Social Aspects of Western Zhou Ritual Paul

Home , Bai Qi, Bo Qin, Duke of Shao, Fangyi, Guang (vessel), Guan Li

Between Kin and King: Social Aspects of Western Zhou Ritual

Paul Nicholas Vogt

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

2012

ABSTRACT

Between Kin and King: Social Aspects of Western Zhou Ritual

Paul Nicholas Vogt

The Western Zhou period (ca. 1045-771 BCE) saw the dissemination of a particular style of ancestral ritual across North China, as the Zhou royal faction leveraged its familiarity with the ritual techniques of the conquered Shang culture to complement its project of state formation.

Looking back on this era as the golden age of governance, Eastern Zhou and Han thinkers sought to codify its ritual in comprehensive textual treatments collectively known as the Sanli and, in particular, the Zhouli , or “Rites of Zhou.” Later scholarship has consistently drawn on the Sanli as a reference point and assumed standard for the characterization of Western Zhou rites. Current understandings of the formative era of early Chinese ritual are thus informed by the syncretic and classicizing tendencies of the early empires.

To redress this issue, the present study explores the ritual practices of the Western Zhou based on their records on inscribed bronzes, the most extensive source of textual information on the period. It characterizes Western Zhou ancestral rites as fluid phenomena subject to continued redefinition, adoption, cooption, and abandonment as warranted by the different interests of

Western Zhou elites. Separate discussions consider the role of ancestral rites and inscribed bronzes in materializing the royal presence within the interaction spheres of elite lineages; the evolution of ritual performances of Zhou kingship, and their relationship to the military and political circumstances of the royal house; the emergence of new ritual contexts of patronage, recognition, and reward that differentiated between members of expanding lineages and intensified royal control over key resources; and the combination of multiple ritual techniques with royal hospitality provision to create major ritual event assemblies. A final synthesis brings

these discussions together into a sequential analysis of Western Zhou ritual, relating them to the evolving political situation of the Zhou royal house.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS i

LIST OF CHARTS, GRAPHS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS vii

CONVENTIONS viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xi

DEDICATION xv

INTRODUCTION: RITUAL AND THE FORMATION OF THE WESTERN ZHOU STATE 1

0.1: Introduction 1

0.2: Background of the study of Zhou ritual 3

0.3: The “Zhou” in Zhou ritual 6

0.4: Theoretical approach to social aspects of ritual 11

0.4.1: “Social aspects” and the “sociology of associations” 11

0.4.2: The king as “obligatory passage point” 14

0.4.3: Regularized actions and the diagnosis of ritual 15

0.4.4: Material objects, social objects, and “rite names” 21

0.5: Ritual in the inscriptions: prior work and present standpoint 24

0.6: Source materials 25

0.7: Organization of the work 30

CHAPTER 1: LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS: KINSHIP, ANCESTORS, BRONZES, AND THE 34 BASIS OF ZHOU RITUAL

1.1: Introduction 34

1.2: Western Zhou kinship terminology and identity formation 36

1.2.1: Ancestral temples and ancestral lines (Zong 宗宗宗) 36

1.2.1.1: Zong 宗 as location in the Western Zhou inscriptions 37

1.2.1.2: Zong as a designation for people 42

1.2.1.3: Summary 47

1.2.2: Kinship-based military units (Zu 族族族) 48

1.2.3: Clans/surnames (xing 姓姓姓) 50

1.2.4: Shi 氏氏氏 54

1.2.4.1: Early Western Zhou cases of shi 氏 54

1.2.4.2: Middle Western Zhou cases of shi 氏 56

1.2.4.3: Late Western Zhou cases of shi 氏 58

1.2.4.4: Summary 61

1.2.5: The terminology of Western Zhou group identity 62

1.3: Feasting, edible sacrifices, inscribed bronze vessels, and ancestral ritual 63

1.3.1: The ethic of presence in bronze inscriptions and the “distributed personhood” of the king 63

1.3.2: Creating ancestors 67

1.3.3: Creating lineages 71

1.3.4: Reporting in the presence of the ancestors 73

1.3.5: Feasting and ritual participation 79

1.3.6: Sets of bronzes and sets of ancestors 83

1.4: Conclusion 87

CHAPTER 2: TAKING PART AND TAKING OVER: WESTERN ZHOU ANCESTRAL RITES AS 90 SOCIAL OBJECTS

2.1: Introduction 90

2.2: Shared rites 92

2.2.1: Livestock rites and royal patronage 93

2.2.1.1: Di/chi 禘/啻 93

2.2.1.1.1: Royal performances of di/chi 94

2.2.1.1.2: Non-royal performances of di/chi 97

2.2.1.1.3: Di 帝, di 禘, chi 啻, and the Bamboo Annals 100

2.2.1.1.4: Summary 102

2.2.1.2: Lao 牢/ Da lao 大牢 104

2.2.1.2.1: Royal instances of lao in the Western Zhou inscriptions (or the lack thereof) 104

2.2.1.2.2: Non-royal instances of lao in Western Zhou inscriptions 105

2.2.1.2.3: Summary 109

2.2.2: Rites appearing mainly during the early Western Zhou 111

2.2.2.1: Liao 燎 (burnt offering) 111

2.2.2.2: Rong  115

2.2.2.3: Yu 禦 (exorcism/warding) 119

2.2.2.3.1: Non-royal instances of yu 禦 (early Western Zhou) 119

2.2.2.3.2: Royal instances of yu (late Western Zhou) 122

2.2.2.3.3: Yu in the Zhouyuan oracle bones 124

2.2.2.3.4: Summary 124

2.2.3: Terms forming the shared rubric of Western Zhou ritual 127

2.2.3.1: Hui Ο (entreaty) 127

2.2.3.1.1: Royal performances of hui recorded by high-ranking elites 128

2.2.3.1.2: Royal hui as an opportunity for subordinate elites 133

2.2.3.1.3: Non-royal sponsorship of hui : the Ze Ling bronzes 136

2.2.3.1.4: Hui as a declared vessel purpose 140

2.2.3.1.5: Hui in the Zhouyuan oracle bone inscriptions 143

2.2.3.1.6: Summary 145

2.2.3.2: Zheng 烝/蒸 (deng 登) 148

2.2.3.2.1: Cases of zheng in Western Zhou inscriptions: royal performances 148

2.2.3.2.2: Western Zhou vessels cast for the purpose of zheng : non-royal inscriptions 154

2.2.3.2.3: Zheng in received texts of possible Western Zhou date 156

2.2.3.2.4: Summary 160

2.2.3.3: Zhu 祝 (invocation) 161

2.2.3.3.1: Zhu in Western Zhou bronze inscriptions 161

2.2.3.3.3: Summary 164

2.3: Ancestral rituals performed only by Zhou kings 165

iii

2.3.1: Su () (AS glosses as 餗餗餗) 166

2.3.1.1: Su in inscriptions 166

2.3.1.2: Su in received texts of possible Western Zhou date 168

2.3.1.3: Summary 169

2.3.2: Yue 禴禴禴 171

2.3.2.1: Yue in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions 171

2.3.2.2: Yue in received texts of possible Western Zhou date 172

2.3.2.3: Summary 174

2.4: Ancestral rites never performed by the Zhou king in the inscriptions 176

2.4.1: Chang 嘗嘗嘗 176

2.4.2: Sheng 升升升 178

2.4.3: Sui 歲歲歲 180

2.4.4: Yin 禋禋禋 182

2.3.5: Zhuo 酌酌酌 183

2.5: Conclusions 184

CHAPTER 3: FIGURING THE KING: MIMESIS, PRODUCTION, AND THE RITUAL 190 PORTRAYAL OF ZHOU KINGSHIP

3.1: Introduction 190

3.2: Rituals framing the Zhou king as mediator 191

3.2.1: Feng /li 豐豐豐/禮禮禮 192

3.2.1.1: The etymology of feng/li 193

3.2.1.2: Da feng 大豐/da li 大禮 (“the Great Rite”) 195

3.2.1.3: The Bo Tangfu ding event: an occurrence of the “Great Rite”? 200

3.2.1.4: Summary 205

3.2.2: Jitian/jinong 籍田/籍農 (“ploughing fields”) 206

3.2.2.1: Ritual ploughing in later texts 209

3.2.2.2: The coercive implications of ritual ploughing 212

3.2.3: Zhiju 執駒 (“catching foals”) 214

3.2.3.1: The foal-catching rite in the Western Zhou inscriptions 214

3.2.3.1: The foal-catching rite and the management of horses in early China 221

3.3: Conclusion: figuring and refiguring the Zhou king 226

CHAPTER 4: ENROLLING ALLIES: REOGNITION, REWARD, AND THE RITUAL 232 INSTANTIATION OF PATRONAGE

4.1: Introduction 232

4.2: Mieli 蔑歷 (“recounting of merits”) 233

4.2.1: Mieli in the early Western Zhou inscriptions 235

4.2.2: Mieli in the middle Western Zhou inscriptions 237

4.2.3: Mieli in the late Western Zhou inscriptions 243

4.2.4: Summary and further discussion 244

4.3: She 射射射 (archery) 248

4.3.1: Royal archery as military metaphor 249

4.3.2: Archery as education vs. archery as diplomacy 253

4.3.3: Summary and further discussion 267

4.4: The official appointment ceremony 274

4.4.1: Physical orientation of ritual participants 278

4.4.2: The appointment ceremony and changing models of patronage 280

4.4.3: Written documents, the appointment ceremony, and the production of inscribed bronzes 281

4.5: Conclusion: evolving strategies of patronage and enrollment 284

CHAPTER 5: WESTERN ZHOU RITUAL: A SEQUENTIAL AND REINTEGRATIVE ANALYSIS 288

5.1: Introduction 288

5.2: Ancestors and the ethic of presence: early Western Zhou ritual 290

5.2.1: Separating from Shang: The formation of Zhou ritual in the period of expansion 292

5.2.2: Early Western Zhou ritual assemblies: the example of the Mai fangzun 295

5.2.3: Early Western Zhou royal ritual and political strategies 300

5.2.3.1: Lineage and the state in early Western Zhou ritual 303

5.2.3.2: Persuasive royal strategies of group formation 304

5.2.3.3: Materialized ideology and the relaying of royal rites through bronzes 307

5.3: The transformation of Western Zhou ritual 311

5.3.1: The crisis of Zhou royal power and the historical context of the transition 314

5.3.2: The peak of Western Zhou ritual diversity under King Mu 315

5.3.3: The rites of the post-King Mu period 318

5.4: The issue of the “ritual reform” or “ritual revolution” 321

5.4.1: The “ritual reform” argument and its correlation with the bronze inscriptions 323

5.4.2: Causes of the “ritual reform” 327

5.4.3: The political logic of the “ritual reform” and the post-King Mu changes in Zhou royal ritual 328

5.5: Conclusion 332

CONCLUSION 335

APPENDIX 1: ADDITIONAL TERMS 339

7.1: Introduction 339

7.2: The question of guan 祼祼祼 (libation/toasting) 339

7.3: Chai 髭髭髭/柴柴柴/祡祡祡 346

APPENDIX 2: TABLES AND FIGURES 351

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 372

BIBLIOGRAPHY 375

LIST OF CHARTS, GRAPHS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS

Table 0.1: The chronology of the Western Zhou kings 351

Table 1.1: Frequency of xing 姓 names in dateable Shang and Western Zhou bronze 352 inscriptions (following the AS database)

Table 1.2: Western Zhou tombs with bronze vessel assemblages from Zhangjiapo, 353 Gaojiabao, and the Yu state cemetery at Baoji

Table 2.1: Vessels declaring hui ȼ as a purpose 355

Table 4.1: Instances of mieli 蔑曆 in early Western Zhou inscriptions 356

Table 4.2: Instances of mieli in middle Western Zhou inscriptions 358

Table 4:3: Datings of middle Western Zhou mieli inscriptions 363

Table 4.4: Instances of mieli in late Western Zhou inscriptions 365

Fig. 2.1: The inscription of the Zuoce Yi you 作冊益卣 (after JC 5427, via the AS 366 database)

Fig. 2.2: Selected instances of zheng 蒸 in the bronze inscriptions 367

Fig. 2.3: Variants of the character su 餗 in the oracle bones (after JGWZGL ), with the Xi 368 Shi Qing zun character (after the AS database)

Fig. 3.1: Variants on feng /related characters in the OBI (after JGWZGL ) 369

Fig. 3.2: Examples of feng in the bronze inscriptions (after the AS database) 369

Fig. 3.3: The inscription of the Li juzun (after JC 6011, via the AS database) 370

Fig. 7.1: Instances of guan 祼 in the AS inscriptions (after the AS database) 371

vii

CONVENTIONS

The chronology of the Western Zhou

While the reign sequence of the Western Zhou period is now beyond question, the exact dates and lengths of the individual reigns are still the subject of frequent debate. 1 The present work is not concerned with the precise details of Western Zhou chronology; it does, however, frequently refer to the reign-periods of specific kings, as well as to the early, middle, and late

Western Zhou periods. When more detail is needed, it follows the reign dates and lengths put forth by Edward L. Shaughnessy in Sources of Western Zhou History: Inscribed Bronze Vessels

and continued by Li Feng in Bureaucracy and the State in Early China ; Appendix 2, table 0.1,

presents this chronology for the reader’s reference. 2 Like the latter work, this dissertation uses

the early/middle/late divisions put forth by Chen Mengjia in Xi Zhou tongqi duandai .3 It follows

the common practice of referring to 懿王, the eighth Western Zhou king (inclusive of King Wen),

as “King Yih” and to the tenth king, 夷王, as “King Yi.”

Transcription, translation, and transliteration

Transliteration of Chinese throughout this work follows the Hanyu pinyin system; for ease of typography, Romanization of Japanese employs kana spelling for long vowels (e.g., ou

1 Over forty different efforts at reconstructing the reign periods of the Western Zhou kings have been put forth by modern scholars; see Zhu Fenghan and Zhang Rongming, eds., Xi Zhou zhuwang niandai yanjiu , Guiyang: Guizhou renmin, 1998, 442; cited in Edward L. Shaughnessy, “Chronologies of Ancient China: A Critique of the ‘Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project,’” in Clara Wing-chung Ho, Windows on the Chinese World: Reflections by Five Historians, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2009, 15-28. For a recent alternate effort at reconstructing the Western Zhou royal chronology, see Xia Shang Zhou duandai gongcheng zhuanjiazu, Xia Shang Zhou diandai gongcheng: 1996-2000 nian jieduan chengguo baogao, Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2000. For an English-language summary, see Li Xueqin, “The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project: Methodology and Results,” JEAA 4.1-4 (2002), 321-33. This project has been subject to some criticism, such as, for example, the above article by Shaughnessy. 2 Sources , xix; Bureaucracy , xv. For a reproduction of this sequence, see Appendix 2. 3 Duandai , 354, 491-524. viii

instead of o-macron). Transcriptions and punctuation of bronze inscriptions follow those given in the AS database except where noted. I have relied on the AS database transcriptions of bronze characters (again, except where noted) but, for typographic purposes, have constructed font characters to replace the AS font itself. Translations of bronze inscriptions, oracle bone inscriptions, and excerpts of received texts are my own except where noted.

Place names, personal names, and titles

The Chinese administrative division xian 县 is rendered as “county” (e.g., Mei county,

Shaanxi), while town- or village-level name components (i.e., cun 村 and zhen 镇) are included

in the Romanization of place-names. City- and provincial-level divisions ( shi 市 and sheng 省)

are not indicated.

For the convenience of non-specialist readers, I have given approximate English

equivalents for the various qualifying elements of Western Zhou names; thus Shi Yongfu 師雍父, for example, is rendered as “Marshal Father Yong.” Characters and Pinyin Romanization are provided for reference on first appearance within a chapter. In keeping with this principle, I have followed the old custom of translating ancient Chinese aristocratic ranks with the titles of

English nobility; hence “King” for wang 王, “Duke” for gong , 公 “Marquis” for hou 侯, and so forth. This custom is followed for the ease of the reader and should not be construed as implying any real equivalence between the Western Zhou and English systems of nobility and governance.

That notion has by now been thoroughly disproved. See Constance Cook, “Wealth and the

Western Zhou,” BSOAS 60.2 (1997), 283-90; Li Feng, “Feudalism and Western Zhou China: A

Criticism,” HJAS 63.1 (June 2003), 115-44.

References to inscriptions

Whenever possible, first references to Shang and Western Zhou bronze inscriptions provide their numbers in the Academia Sinica database (see above). Most such inscriptions appear in the Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng (JC); numbers with no prefix (e.g., the designation of the

Minggong gui 明公簋 [4029]) correspond to those in that work. Since the AS database was first

made available, many bronzes not appearing in JC have been added; these are typically

designated with numbers beginning with NA (e.g., the Jing ding 静鼎 [NA1795]).

All of the few Shang oracle bone inscriptions in this work are derived from the CHANT

OBI database (for which see http://www.chant.org). All cases appearing here were published in

Guo Moruo and Hu Houxuan, eds., Jiaguwen heji , 13 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980; the

numbering provided here follows that in the CHANT database and corresponds to that in Heji .

Numbering of Zhou oracle bones follows that in Cao Wei 曹瑋, Zhouyuan jiaguwen 周原甲骨文,

Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2002.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The great pleasure of completing a work such as this is the chance to recall all of the colleagues, family members, friends, and institutions that supported its development. I am grateful to have that opportunity.

First and foremost, I owe thanks to the advisors who have given me the tools and the training that brought me to this point. Professor Sarah Allan of Dartmouth College gave me my initial training in early China studies; more importantly, she instilled in me an interest in the early Chinese milieu that has lasted through the last fifteen years. From the first seminar I took with her on the pre-Qin philosophers to the present, she has consistently provided me with help, advice, and support. She has my deepest thanks. Professor Robert Henricks encouraged me in the first steps of my study of Chinese religions, for which I will always be grateful. During my years at Dartmouth, I benefited as well from the guidance of Professor Susan Blader, Mr. Gerard

Bohlen, Professor Allen Hockley, Professor Hua-yuan Li Mowry, Professor Xing Wen, and

Professor Crispin Williams. I thank them for their help and their patience. I am grateful as well to Professor Qi Wenxin for some of my fondest memories of Dartmouth; Professor Qi was kind enough to guide me patiently through the basics of oracle bone script during her time in Hanover.

At Stanford, I had the privilege of working with Professor Mark Lewis, who taught me much about how to formulate a project and how to run a seminar; I hope my classes will be as vigorous and engaging as his. Professor Fabrizio Pregadio unflappably guided me through tentative explorations of then-unfamiliar primary sources; I thank him for his patience and good cheer.

Professor Fred Porta was both kind and adventurous enough to delve into new, little-used languages with me; I thank him especially for introducing me to a new side of manuscript studies.

My utmost thanks go to Professor Li Feng for all of the instruction, advice, and opportunities that he has given me over many years of study. Professor Li has always warmly encouraged me to take an active hand in projects of all sorts. Under his guidance, I have enjoyed many rare opportunities that have advanced my understanding of the field in ways I could not have foreseen, for which I am extremely grateful. He has consistently pushed me to adhere to the highest standards of evidence in supporting my conclusions – the nicest compliment, I think, that one scholar can pay to another. His guidance over the course of this project has been patient, compassionate, and exacting. Any achievements this work has made are to his credit, while any faults that remain are my responsibility alone.

My further thanks go to Professor Robert Hymes and Professor Wiebke Denecke for their guidance and support through the process of my examinations and since, and to Professor David

Branner for introducing me to the labyrinthine world of Chinese historical linguistics. I owe a great debt to Professor Ellen Fowles Morris for guiding me through my first studies of archaeology outside the Chinese context, and to Professor Severin Morris Fowles for encouraging me to continue with them. The readings and ruminations in which Professor Fowles guided me during our studies together form much of the basis for this work. Professors Brian

Boyd, Zoe Crossland, and Terence D’Altroy were also encouraging of my forays into the

Department of Anthropology; all of them have my thanks.

I have benefited from the warm welcome and kind support of many teachers and colleagues in China. Professor Liu Yuan spent many hours instilling me with a solid grounding in the methods of paleography. Professor Zhu Fenghan received me with open arms during the research phase of this project and allowed me to share in exciting new discoveries. His suggestions were invaluable in the development of the approach taken in this work. Professor

xii

Han Wei graciously allowed me to take part in his excellent seminar on the bronze inscriptions.

Guan Xiaoning of the Department of History, Peking University, gave generously of his time to help me make the arrangements necessary for research in China. Professor Zhu’s doctoral students all strove to make me feel welcome; I would be remiss not to single out Wei Xinying for her kind assistance as I settled into life in Beijing.

This project, and the graduate studies on which it is based, has enjoyed financial support from a number of institutional sources, including the Foreign Language and Area Studies fellowship program; the Weatherhead East Asian Institute at Columbia University; the Graduate

School of Arts and Sciences at Columbia University, which furnished a grant that supported research in Beijing; and the Mrs. Giles Whiting Foundation, a grant from which supported the writing of this work. I am indebted to all for their assistance.

Over the years, I have had the pleasure of studying and working with numerous talented classmates and co-researchers, including in particular Elizabeth Licata, Hsieh Mei-yu, Brett

Rogers, and Dominic Steavu at Stanford; Glenda Chao, Kaet Heupel, Han-peng Ho, Brian

Lander, Wu Minna, and Darryl Wilkinson at Columbia; and Professor Liang Zhonghe, Elizabeth

Berger, Athena Hsieh, Han Hui, and Jeremiah Trinidad-Christensen during my work on the

Guicheng site, among many others. My scholarly approach has been shaped by our many conversations and shared projects, for which I am in their debt.

A project such as this cannot come to fruition without the ongoing emotional support of a host of friends and family members. I would like to thank Nick Cyr, Chris Dalby, James Palmer, and Jon Stelling for becoming my surrogate family during my time in Beijing. Michael, Jeanne, and Carolyn Licata have gone to great lengths to help and encourage me throughout my studies and the writing of this dissertation. My parents, Daniel and Elizabeth Stock, have always given

xiii

me the utmost in love, support, and good cheer. I could not have completed this work without them.

Thanks are insufficient to express my gratitude to my wife, Elizabeth. She has provided incisive feedback on every stage of the project from inception to completion; but beyond that, she has been and is still the only motivation driving me to improve my work and myself. I have no way to repay her, but I hope that dedicating this work to her is a start.

xiv

For Elizabeth like everything I do

INTRODUCTION RITUAL AND THE FORMATION OF THE WESTERN ZHOU STATE

0.1: Introduction

The Western Zhou period (ca. 1045-771 BCE) was understandably remembered by classical Chinese thinkers as a “golden age.” 1 With its expansion over the course of the eleventh and tenth centuries BCE, the Zhou state established a vision of most of what is now north China as a single, coherent political and cultural entity. 2 That vision informed much of the classic philosophical and historical literature of ancient China. 3 Its influence was such that the chief

powers of the subsequent era persisted in formulating their political identities in terms of service

to the Zhou kings and the state in general, long after the temporal power of the Zhou royal house

had been irrevocably compromised. 4 The five and a half centuries following the sacking of the

Zhou homeland and the eastern movement of the Zhou royal party are thus still known to history as the “Eastern Zhou” period. 5

The advanced expertise of the Zhou royal house with both ritual and writing played a

crucial role in its success. From the very eve that they sacked the capital of Shang, home of their

1 David Shepherd Nivison, “The Classical Philosophical Writings,” in Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, eds., The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, 747-8. Dates in this work follow those given therein. 2 On the expansion of the Western Zhou state, see Edward L. Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 320-2. 3 See Nivison, “The Classical Philosophical Writings,” 747-8. This idea is summarized in the phrase tianxia 天下 (“under heaven”), tian , “the sky/Heaven,” being of special importance to the Zhou. For an early statement on tian , see Herrlee G. Creel, The Origins of Statecraft in China, vol. 1: The Western Chou Empire , Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 1970, 493-506; for a recent consideration, see Sarah Allan, “Tian as Sky: The Conceptual Implications,” in Jacques Gernet and Marc Kalinowski, eds., En suivant la Voie Royale: Mélanges offerts en homage à Léon Vandermeersch, Études thématiques 7, Paris: École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 197, 225-30; as well as Allan, “On the Identity of Shang Di 上帝 and the Origin of the Concept of a Celestial Mandate (tian ming 天明),” EC 31, 2007, 1-46. For the role of tianxia in classical Chinese philosophical texts, see for example Lunyu , “Ji shi,” Shisanjing zhushu , 2521; Mengzi , “Liang Hui Wang,” Shisanjing zhushu , 2670. 4 This was made manifest in the institution of the ba , or “hegemon,” on which see Cho-yun Hsu, “The Spring and Autumn Period,” in Cambridge History , 551-62. 5 On the events surrounding the eastern movement of the Zhou royal house, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 233-78. For the traditional historical account, see Shiji , 147-9.

predecessors as the dominant power in north China, the Zhou kings drew on ritual actions of

Shang provenance to create ritual event assemblies that argued for particular visions of their

relations to the conquered Shang kings, the remnants of the Shang population, and the various

other peoples with whom they had partnered to throw off the Shang yoke. 6 In the following years, the Zhou kings capitalized on the use of inscribed bronzes in ancestral-ritual and feasting events – a practice derived from the Shang before them – as a key mechanism for the promulgation of royal ideology, associating the Zhou royal project and the legitimacy of the

Zhou kings with the sacerdotal authority of the patrilineal ancestral cult. As the geopolitical, military, and demographic circumstances of the Western Zhou state changed, the ritual practices of both the Zhou kings and non-royal Zhou-adherent elites as understood through the use of ritual bronze vessels changed with them, eventually achieving a degree of formalism and codification that rivaled that of late Shang ritual and survived into the subsequent Eastern Zhou period. 7

This work draws on the bronze inscriptions of the Western Zhou period, supplemented by related archaeological data and by occasional reference to received texts of likely Western Zhou date, to characterize the social aspects of the ritual practices of Western Zhou elites. It considers both religious and political rituals – a questionable distinction in the relevant sources – as elements of the process of group formation during the Western Zhou period. The work characterizes the progress of royal implementation of ritual techniques from concern with enrollment of non-royal elites in the Zhou state project to concern with the internal

6 The “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu records rituals conducted by King Wu at Shang in the wake of the Shang conquest, including a case of the negative entreaty known as yu 禦. See Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu jiaopu zhuyi , Xi’an: Sanqin, 2006, 210-21; for an analysis in English, see Edward L. Shaughnessy, Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Chinese Classics , Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997, 31-67. 7 On the introduction and intensification of sumptuary rules in Western Zhou ritual, see Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius (1000-250 BC): The Archaeological Evidence , Los Angeles: The Cotsten Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, 2006, 49-50. On the systematization of late Shang ritual, see David Keightley, “The Shang: China’s First Historicay Dynasty,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China, 237-45.

differentiation of participants in the Zhou elite identity and refinement of royal control over state

operations and the production of vital resources. It relates this progression to both general

demographic processes and specific historical events – in particular, the cessation of Zhou

expansion and the untimely death of King Zhao, the nominal fifth Zhou king. In doing so, it puts

forth a detailed image of the role of inscribed bronze vessels in transporting ideological

manifestations of power across distance in both time and space. Bronzes and their inscriptions, it

argues, transmitted ritual materializations of ideology between kin and king. 8

0.2: Background of the study of Zhou ritual

The “Fengshan shu” chapter of the Shiji, China's first syncretic history, records that

Emperor Wu of the Han dynasty followed ritual and administrative precedents set by the state of

Qin during its grand project of centralization in order to placate Heaven and establish the legitimacy of the Han state. Later, near the end of the Western Han, the reformers Zhang Tan and Kuang Heng urged the rejection of these precedents in favor of a ritual program conducted mainly in the capital and focused on the relationship between the ruler, Heaven, and Earth. As justification for their program, they appealed to texts purporting to preserve a ritual tradition established by the Zhou, founders of China's first bureaucratic state and perceived cultural predecessors of the many regional elites subordinated first under Qin Shihuang (b. 259 BCE) and then under Liu Bang (r. 202-195 BCE). 9

8 On the materialization of ideology as described by DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, see section 0.4.5 below; on “transportation” and its costs, see Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, 173. 9 Michael Puett, To Become a God: Cosmology, Sacrifice, and Self-Divinization in Early China, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002, 300-13; Shiji , “Fengshan shu.” These dates follow those given in Denis Twitchett and John Fairbank, eds., Cambridge History of China , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978-, vol. 1.

This reversal was the culmination of a trend in early Chinese conceptions of kinship,

authority, and ritual that evolved over the course of the Eastern Zhou period. As the temporal

power of the Zhou royal house receded further into the depths of history, the conceptual power

of the Zhou cultural heritage – its potential as a locus of value, a legitimizing force, and an

indicator of civilization vs. barbarity – became an object of contention between competing

experts with various familial, regional, and intellectual affiliations. Ritual practices came to be

seen as the ultimate expression of that cultural heritage, due at least in part to the influence of the

ru intellectual and political tradition of which Confucius was the earliest and, eventually, the best known proponent. At the same time, the expansion of the practice of writing ensured that the battle to canonize and thereby lay incontrovertible claim to Zhou ritual took place on the page as well as in the context of living practices. 10 Han imperial ritual would eventually become the

state-sanctioned incarnation of a system of “Zhou” ritual built in this context of competition for

the right to direct burgeoning processes of political, cultural, and ideological syncretism. The

Sanli – a triptych of canonical texts emerging from the Warring States and Han historical context and purporting to record various aspects of “classic” Zhou ritual – served as the vehicle for the standard portrayal of the Zhou ritual system for the remainder of pre-modern Chinese history. 11

A major challenge to the Sanli -driven vision of Zhou ritual appeared in the twentieth

century with the emergence of the “Doubting Antiquity” movement, an effort among Chinese

scholars to call into active question visions of the earliest stretches of history based on texts long

10 Book-length explorations of the conjunction between writing and ritual in early China include Li Feng and David Prager Branner, eds., Writing and Literacy in Early China , Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2011; Martin Kern, ed., Text and Ritual in Early China , Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2005. 11 On the Sanli , see William G. Boltz, “Chou li 周礼,” in Michael Loewe, ed., Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993, 24-32; Boltz, “I li 仪礼”, in Loewe, 234-43; and Jeffrey K. Riegel, “Li chi 礼记”, in Loewe, 293-7.

touted as canonical. 12 This came on the heels of the discovery of inscribed oracle bones dating to

the Shang period near Anyang, Henan, site of the last Shang capital. 13 Early traditions held that

the Zhou adopted the ritual traditions of the Shang, with a few small but ideologically important

changes such as a reduction in the volume of alcohol consumption in the context of group rites. 14

Naturally, the discovery of the Shang oracle bones and the accompanying Shang remains at

Anyang spurred new research into the ritual practices of the Zhou as well, with the Shang

materials as counterpoint to a combined corpus of scientifically excavated Zhou-period remains,

received texts long regarded as products of the Western Zhou era, and Zhou bronze inscriptions

transmitted across the centuries by antiquarians of the Song to Qing dynasties. Received texts of

uncertain date purporting to deal with Zhou ritual – the Sanli in particular – continue, however, to constitute an important and oft-used tool for the interpretation of these verifiably earlier materials, due no doubt in part to a newfound confidence in early texts inspired by the remarkable degree of correspondence found between the Anyang materials and later records preserved in the Shiji .15

By now, the groundwork has been laid for a new approach to the characterization of the

ritual activities of the Zhou. The last half of the twentieth century and the first decade of the

twenty-first have seen an unprecedented volume of discoveries of Zhou-era archaeological

materials. Examples of Western Zhou meeting halls, elite residences, and pottery and bronze

12 For the core writings of the movement, see Gu Jiegang and Luo Genze, eds., Gu shi bian , vol. 1-7, Beiping: Pushe, 1926-41. 13 For a thorough history of the study of the oracle bone inscriptions; see Wang Yuxin and Yang Shengnan, eds., Jiaguxue yibai nian , Beijing: Shehui kexue wenxian, 1999. On their discovery see also J.A. Lefeuvre, “Les inscriptions des Shang sur carapaces de tortue et sur os: aperçu historique et bibliographique de la découverte et des premières etudes,” T’oung Pao 61 (1975), 1-82 (cited in David Keightley, “The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 236 note 10). 14 For an early statement of the historical tradition that the ritual practices of the Zhou developed from those of the Shang, see Lunyu, “Wei zheng” 23, Shisanjing zhushu, 2463. On the teetotaling impulse as a means of differentiation from Shang, see Shangshu , “Jiu gao,” Shisanjing zhushu , 205-8. 15 On the role of archaeology in the relationship between the “Doubting Antiquity” movement spearheaded by Gu Jiegang and the “Believing Antiquity” movement associated with if not actually supported by Li Xueqin, see Shaughnessy in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 5-10.

workshops are all available, in addition to a bewildering variety of shapes and sizes of elite

tombs. Major loci of Zhou-affiliated cultural remains have been discovered across the scope of

the pre-Qin Chinese world, from the Yu-culture remains near Baoji, western Shaanxi, to the

Guicheng urban center near the north coast of the Jiaodong peninsula in Shandong. The corpus

of extant bronze inscriptions – the most reliable and extensive source of contemporary textual

records – has grown substantially, and the vast majority of these inscriptions, along with the

details of the discovery of the bronzes bearing them, are readily accessible. 16 The growth of bronze inscriptional studies in turn has yielded insights as to the language of the Western Zhou period that have helped to verify certain received texts as likely products of that era and eliminate others. In short, for the first time in millennia, the resources exist to support a characterization of the ritual activities of the Zhou based primarily neither on later, politicized textual records nor on the divination records of an earlier people, but on contemporary sources produced by the Zhou themselves. Such a characterization would in turn provide a standard to which later textual materials purporting to record Zhou ritual activities – in particular, the Sanli –

could be compared. Developing such a characterization and establishing such a standard are

goals of this project.

0.3: The “Zhou” in Zhou ritual

Proposing an examination of “Western Zhou ritual activities” implies that the label “Zhou”

constitutes a coherent, recognizable, and falsifiable cultural category rather than a convenient

16 Most of these inscriptions are published in Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, ed., Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng , 18 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984-94. Qiu Dexiu, ed., Shang Zhou jinwen jicheng , Taipei: Wunan, 1983- 5, or in the subsequent collection by Liu Yu and Lu Yan, eds., Jin chu Yin Zhou jinwen jilu , Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002. Between the two of them, these sources contain 13,317 inscriptions; see Bureaucracy , 2. These as well as many more recently discovered inscriptions are now accessible electronically through the Academia Sinica’s Yin Zhou jinwen ji qingtongqi ziliaoku (“Digital Archives of Bronze Images and Inscriptions”), accessible at http://www.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/~bronze/ . That source identifies 6076 of its inscriptions as products of the Western Zhou (figure retrieved in April 2012).

borrowing of a place name to denote a specific period of history. The origins of the Zhou

geographic and cultural identity remain tantalizingly murky. Historical texts record that the

Zhou people originated in the western parts of current Shaanxi but moved to the region now

known as “the Zhou Plain” ( Zhouyuan 周原), in the vicinity of Mount Qi ( Qishan 岐山), during

the late Shang period. There they are said to have served at least nominally as vassals of the

Shang, with prominent Zhou leaders serving at the Shang court, until the depredations of the

tyrannical Shang king Jie forced the first King of Zhou, Wen, to assemble an alliance of “men of

the West” (the Zhou homeland lay in the far western portion of the Shang sphere of influence);

sack the Shang capital, Yin, at the present-day city of Anyang, Henan; and establish a new rule

with the blessing of Heaven ( Tian ), the closest thing to a supreme deity known from the records

of the Zhou. 17

Archaeological materials support this grand narrative of the birth of the Zhou to a certain extent. Excavations at Qishan have uncovered substantive ceramic and bronze remains, including Anyang-style bronzes, suggesting the possibility of a population in extensive contact with the Shang as well as other groups; this population cannot, however, be definitively identified as “Zhou” based on inscriptions. Generally speaking, ceramics in Shaanxi dating to before the Shang conquest, while conforming to a few specific overall types, show extensive formal variation from place to place, suggesting that the area was not yet under the control of a single, hegemonic cultural complex. A consensus has not been yet reached as to precisely which elements of these various cultures, if any, can be taken as indicative of a pre-conquest “Zhou”

17 See James Legge, The Chinese Classics, vol. 3: The Shoo King or the Book of Historical Documents , Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960, “The Speech at Muh,” 300-5; Wang Liqi, ed., Shiji zhuyi , Xi'an: Sanqin, 1988, vol. 1, “Zhou benji 周本纪,” 73-118; William H. Nienhauser, Jr., ed., Tsai-fa Cheng, Zongli Lu, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., and Robert Reynolds, eds., Sima Qian 司馬遷, The Grand Scribe’s Records, vol. 1: The Basic Annals of Pre-Han China, Taipei: SMC Publishing, 1994, 55-7. The move to the Qishan region is said to have taken place in the time of “the Old Duke, Father Dan” (Gugong Danfu ), grandfather of King Wen.

culture in its least adulterated form. It remains a strong possibility that the formation of a Zhou

cultural identity took place concurrently with the convergence of western forces that is

commonly supposed to have precipitated the sacking of the Shang capital. 18

The origins and antiquity of “Zhou” as a distinct cultural identity, then, are less than clear.

Nevertheless, there exists a recognizable assemblage of material-cultural characteristics that can

readily be identified as the population associated with elite activities in the region known from

both received texts and bronze inscriptions to have been the center of power of the Zhou people

during the Western Zhou period. 19 These include cemeteries dominated by prone burials in rectangular tombs with tiers ( ercengtai ), sometimes including yaokeng , or waist-pits, beneath the center of the corpse,20 as well as assemblages of bronze food and drink vessels intended at least nominally for use in devotional activities dedicated to patrilineal ancestors, sharing certain chronologically variant commonalities of shape and decor, and frequently bearing extensive inscriptions.21

The Zhou elite shared these characteristics with the Shang, from whom they are commonly supposed to have learned the art of writing. Indeed, the question of the exact relationship between the Zhou and Shang peoples was one of the major research questions of twentieth-century Chinese archaeology, paleography, and history, and it remains so today.

Evidence from bronze inscriptions, however, allows us to state with certainty that the Zhou population itself was engaged in the production and use of bronze ritual vessels from the early

18 Jessica Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 376-85. On the general archaeological situation in the Plain of Zhou, see Chen Quanfang, Zhouyuan yu Zhou wenhua , Shanghai: Renmin, 1988. 19 Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 358 20 Ibid. 21 For a detailed analysis of the formal characteristics of Western Zhou bronzes, see Wang Shimin, Chen Gongrou, and Zhang Changshou, Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu , Beijing: Wenwu, 1999. On the bronzes of the Zhou homeland in particular, see Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo et al., Shaanxi chutu Shang Zhou qingtongqi , 4 vols., Beijing: Wenwu, 1979-84; Cao Wei, ed., Zhouyuan chutu qingtongqi, 10 vols., Chengdu: Ba shu, 2005.

portion of the Western Zhou period onward. 22 Western Zhou bronzes soon developed differences from Shang bronzes in style and then in typical vessel assemblages. 23

A cluster of cemetery and settlement sites surrounding the Feng river near Xi’an, Shaanxi,

is widely recognized as the remains of a major Zhou urban center associated with the capitals

Feng and Hao -- locations frequently mentioned in bronze inscriptions – and is generally held

forth as a standard against which Zhou material culture is judged, though Western Zhou

materials recovered in the Zhouyuan area are now challenging it for that distinction. 24 Materials associated with Western Zhou elites have been found across the scope of North China, however.

Many of these include bronzes with inscriptions identifying them as products of Zhou elite activities; often these sites can be associated with Zhou-affiliated states known from later historical records, as in the cases of the Jin state cemetery at Tianma-Qucun, Shanxi, and the Yan state cemetery at Fangshan, Liulihe, Beijing. 25 Sometimes, “Zhou-style” items and practices

from these sites can readily be distinguished from those with local characteristics, as is the case

at Tianma-Qucun. 26 At other sites, controversy exists over the possibility of distinguishing between “Zhou” and “local” practices, as with the Western Zhou-era materials known from the

Luoyang region. 27

22 For example, Ma Chengyuan's Mingwen xuan assigns 2 of the 533 vessels it covers to the reign of King Wu, 33 to the reign of King Cheng, and 37 more to the “early Western Zhou” in general; see Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwenxuan , 4 vols., Beijing: Wenwu, 1986-90, vol. 3, 1-11 (table of contents). 23 See Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 359-64. 24 Ibid., 390, 393. Landscape and Power , 40-6, offers a detailed summary of the archaeological work done in the Feng river area. For the most extensive reports on sites in this area, see Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, Fengxi fajue baogao, Beijing: Wenwu, 1962; Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, Zhangjiapo Xi Zhou mudi , Beijing: Zhongguo dabaike quanshu chubanshe, 1999. On the cities of Feng and Hao, see Wang Shimin, “Zhou du Feng Hao weizhi shangque,” Lishi yanjiu 1958.2, 63-70; Landscape and Power , 44-6. 25 See Zou Heng et al ., eds., Tianma Qucun, 1980-1989, Beijing: Kexue, 2000; Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo, ed., Liulihe Xi Zhou Yan guo mudi , Beijing: Wenwu, 1995. 26 See Falkenhausen, Chinese Society, 211-3. 27 See Luoyang shi wenwu gongzuodui, Luoyang Beiyao Xi Zhou mu , Beijing: Wenwu, 1999, 367-8, 373, 384. It is notable that the authors of this report consider the proportionately low presence of waist-pits in Beiyao tombs to be a distinguishing factor between Shang and Zhou cultural influences, while Rawson characterizes the use of

The consistency of material remains at sites across North China identifiable as products of “Zhou elite activity” based on inscriptional evidence provides solid ground for the identification of a “Zhou culture” at the elite level. In other words, the material records of the period attest to the existence of a coherent cultural complex with a demonstrable geographic extent that is closely associated with Zhou elite activities and can therefore fruitfully be called

“Zhou culture.” When the terms “Zhou” and “Zhou culture” are used in this work, they refer to this elite cultural and political complex unless otherwise indicated. They specifically do not indicate a fixed ethnic or geographic identity, for it is clear that a variety of populations, including some who might have identified themselves based on ethnicity or place of origin as

“Zhou,” participated in this complex to greater or lesser degrees. On the other hand, there was an identifiable material culture of the Zhou homeland at the non-elite level, distinct from that of the Shang; this was confined mainly to the Wei river valley and surrounding areas, though elements of it were transplanted into the distant east over time. 28 Still, the populations that shared this material culture did not necessarily also share a single formulation of ethnicity, though we can be sure that the people that identified themselves as “Zhou” were among them.

It bears mentioning that the material products of the elite cultural complex here identified as “Zhou” did in fact employ that term as a meaningful concept. Examples abound from

Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, most of which refer to locations called “Zhou” or “Ancestral

Zhou” ( zongzhou 宗周). 29 The term “Zhou,” then, was not a later interpolation imposed on a

waist-pits as a cultural trait shared by the Shang and the Zhou. For a good English-language summary of the issues inherent in distinguishing Shang and Zhou cultural elements in the Luoyang tombs, see Falkenhausen, Chinese Society, 177-86, 192-4. 28 Fengxi fajue baogao and Zhangjiapo put forth the fundamental archaeological standards for the diagnosis of this culture; see Landscape and Power , 43; see also Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 379. For a survey of the various material cultures of the Wei river valley and surrounding areas, see ibid. , 40-58. On the progression of Zhou material culture into the eastern reaches of north China, see ibid., 310-4; Zhongmei lianhe Guicheng kaogudui, “Shandong Longkou shi Guicheng liang Zhou yizhi diaocha jianbao,” Kaogu 2011.3, 30-9. 29 Sources, 76-7.

11 previously dominant group with which contemporary populations were unfamiliar. It was rather a contemporary term used by both the Zhou and the Shang before them and expressing important conceptions of homeland and group identity. 30 In all likelihood, elites who identified themselves

as “Zhou” in these terms shared in the “Zhou culture” as defined here; however, it is also likely

that not all who shared in that culture specifically considered themselves “Zhou.”

0.4: Theoretical approach to social aspects of ritual

The following pages purport to characterize the “social aspects of Western Zhou ritual.”

The historically defined “Western Zhou” part of that formulation produces little controversy

beyond the occasional problem of distinguishing between a late Shang and an early Western

Zhou bronze, or a late Western Zhou and a Spring and Autumn one. 31 An accounting must be made, however, of what “social aspects” are and what the “ritual” that supposedly possesses them is.

0.4.1: “Social aspects” and the “sociology of associations” 32

The ways in which humans relate to each other, form institutions, and create traditions are important and valid areas of inquiry. Unfortunately, when sufficient generalizations are made about how these things happen, “society” and its “systems” may become fetishized, changing from a phenomenon requiring detailed explanation into a panacea called upon to repair

30 The Shang oracle bones make reference to the Zhou by that name; see for example H06657r , recording a divination about a campaign involving the Zhoufang 周方(derived from the CHANT database, http://www.chant.org/ , April 2012). 31 See, however, the above discussion of the precise chronology of the Western Zhou period. Whatever the exact dates, however, there is general agreement that the period began with the sacking of Shang and ended with the relocation of the Zhou royal house to the east. 32 For this phrase, see Latour, Reassembling the Social, 1-12, esp. 9.

12 any perceived gaps in understanding. 33 In the study of Western Zhou ritual, this understandable tendency often manifests in two particular forms. One is the explanation of Shang- and Zhou- dynasty phenomena through appeal to the prescribed sequence of Marxist historiography and the logic of production relations. 34 Another is the tendency to approach the ritual phenomena of the

Western Zhou period, and Western Zhou society in general, as coherent, internally consistent systems, based on their presentation as such in the later texts of the Sanli .35 Both of these trajectories of inquiry are of value, but they must be maintained in their appropriate positions, as possibilities to be proved in every individual case rather than authorities to be invoked in all cases; to put it in Latour’s terms, the price of their deployment must be “paid in transformations.” 36

In his back-and-forth relationship with the idea of “actor-network theory” – of which the work Reassembling the Social is the most recent and detailed manifestation – Latour accuses

much of modern sociology, and critical sociology in particular, of falling victim to this reversal

of causality. 37 In contrast to the appeal to the social as an explanatory force, Latour propounds the project of the “sociology of associations,” a study focusing on the transitory connections between entities, both human and non-human, and their role in the formation and “performation”

33 On this reversal of causality between “explanandum” and “explanans,” see Latour, Reassembling the Social, 100. 34 For a few words on the deployment of the Marxist historical sequence in early China studies, see Peter J. Ucko, “Foreword,” in Sarah Allan, ed., The Formation of Chinese Civilization: An Archaeological Perspective , New Haven, London: Yale University Press; Beijing: New World Press, 2005, xi. For an example of an analysis of an early Chinese rite informed by the logic of production relations, see Yang Kuan’s discussion of the plowing rite in Xi Zhou shi , cited in chapter 3. 35 Efforts of this type include Cen Zhongmian, Xi Zhou shehui zhidu wenti , Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1957; Chen Hanping, Xi Zhou ceming zhidu yanjiu , Shanghai: Xuelin, 1986; Tao Xisheng, Xi Zhou zhengjiao zhidu yanjiu , Taipei: Zhonghua wenhua fuxing yuekan she, 1979. 36 Latour, Reassembling the Social , 173. 37 Prior efforts of Latour’s at approaching the problem of the “social” include Latour, We Have Never Been Modern , Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993; “On Recalling ANT,” in Law and Hassard, eds., Actor Network and After , Oxford: Blackwell, 1999, 15-25; “Gabriel Tarde and the End of the Social,” in Joyce, ed., The Social in Question: New Bearings in History and the Social Sciences , London: Routledge, 2002, 117-32.

13 of group identities. 38 Latour characterizes the formation of groups as ongoing events of

definition and redefinition, of the resolution of controversies which, he argues, can be “deployed”

in order to reveal the particulars of the formation of associations. 39 Objects play a vital role in this process due to their superior ability to act across distances in space and time; they “pick up the relay” between instances of human contact, allowing collectives of which they form parts to last longer. 40 Since all collectives are thus composed, and since their parts typically are themselves connected to a variety of entities across distances, the result is a “flattened” landscape made up of “star-shaped” entities between which hierarchy, or “centrality,” exists only to the degree that particular agencies succeed at continually figuring and re-figuring themselves as crucial to particular visions of group identity.41 These figured agencies are the “actor” (or, sometimes, “actant”), and the ephemeral web of associations between them the “net,” of the actor-network. 42

This work follows Latour’s lead in considering the “social” simply as the formation and re-formation of associations between both human and non-human entities. 43 The roles played by

rituals and their paraphernalia as mediators in the formation of a collective – specifically, the

collective of Zhou elite identity formed in the wake of the Shang conquest – are the “social

aspects” that it seeks to describe. It strives whenever possible to consider each ritual term or

event individually and only afterward to characterize commonalities between them or group

38 On the performation of group identities, see Reassembling the Social , 56. 39 Ibid., 27-42; on “deployment,” see 136-40. 40 Ibid., 63-86; on the “collective,” see 74-5. 41 Ibid., 165-90. On centrality and the star shape, see ibid., 178, and Latour’s proposition of the “oligopticon,” 181-3. 42 On the actant vs. the actor, see ibid., 43-62; on the image of the net, see 131-3, 242. Latour flirts with the alternate term “worknet” or “action net,” to emphasize the sense of action; on this concept see also Barbara Czarniawska, “On Time, Space, and Action Nets,” Organization 16.6.(2004), 777-95. 43 Latour, Reassembling the Social , 11, 64-5, 159-64. Latour employs the term “mediator,” in opposition to the term “intermediary,” to indicate an entity that exercises agency, creates an effect, in the formation of a group rather than simply transmitting the action of one entity to another; on this concept see ibid., 38-40. This work will make frequent use of the term in Latour’s sense.

14 them into categories, rather than appealing to “Zhou society” or the “Zhou ritual system” as independently existing forces driving the actions of Western Zhou elites. The effort at specificity is less radical in a work of history, for which the laying out of individual cases in a sequence to create a convincing narrative is an accepted goal, than in Latour’s effort at the formulation of a new sociology; in this sense his “sociology of associations” is peculiarly well suited for thinking about history. Undoubtedly, however, this work still strays from Latour’s difficult methodological goal in places, for which I ask both his and the reader’s indulgence.

0.4.2: The king as “obligatory passage point”

Much, though not all, of this work focuses on the role of ritual in portraying the Zhou royal house as a preeminent cultural and political force (a state of affairs which persisted well after its temporal power fell behind that of other power-holders in its interaction sphere). It is therefore necessary that the work should have some standpoint as to the creation and maintenance of hierarchical relations between the members of a group. The work of Latour’s actor-network brother in arms, Michel Callon, has proved helpful in this regard. 44 In a seminal

article on the development of artificial scallop cultivation in France, Callon put forth the ideas of

interessement and enrollment, describing respectively the processes of engaging parties in a

particular vision of a group or project and securing their assent to occupy particular roles in the

performance of that group or the pursuit of that project. 45 These formulations, Callon observes,

may argue for a particular entity, institution, or practice as an “obligatory passage point,” i.e., an

44 Latour himself has an approach to this issue; see ibid., 63-4, 82-6. 45 Michel Callon, “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay,” in John Law, ed., Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge , London, Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986, 196-233. For the terms interessement and “enrollment,” see 206-14.

15 interaction partner that must be engaged with in order for the benefits of membership in the interaction network to be achieved. 46

These concepts are all observable in the corpus of bronze inscriptions dealing with the performance of ritual, as well as in the customs of use of the ritual bronzes themselves. In the following pages, I will frequently characterize the ritual actions of the Zhou kings as efforts to solicit the enrollment, new or ongoing, of other elites in the collective that made up the Zhou state and that had the practice of particular forms of ancestral ritual as a hallmark of its identity.47

Certain facets of the performance of that ritual, I will argue, conveyed a vision of the Zhou king

as an “obligatory passage point” for the attainment of status in both lineages and the Zhou state

as a whole.

0.4.3: Regularized action and the diagnosis of ritual

If the “sociology of associations” provides this work with its “social aspects,” then the

“ritual” to which it attributes them remains to be addressed. This work makes no pretense of

offering a better or more extensive definition of ritual than those already put forth by generations

of scholars; nor can it offer a more extensive history of the theory of ritual than has already been

given. 48 It must, however, make clear by what criteria inscriptions have been selected as evidence of ritual practices. 49 Catherine Bell’s recent formulation of ritual has been influential in

46 Ibid., 204-6. I take Callon’s envisioning of a “network of relationships in which social and natural entities mutually control who they are and what they want” as comparable to group formation; see 203-4. 47 See Latour, Reassembling the Social , 74-5. 48 For the most detailed history of the theory of ritual available in English, see Catherine Bell, Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. 49 The past century saw influential theoretical formulations of ritual and its relationship to communication, notably Mary Douglas, Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology , New York: Vintage Books, 1973 (cited in Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice , 45) and Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah, Culture, Thought, and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective , Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1985. Tambiah’s in particular put forth a view of ritual acts as performances of linguistic classes; see Tambiah, 17-59 (see also Bell, Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions , 51-2). Tambiah’s vision has had some influence in the study of Western

16 the development of my approach herein; I will therefore take the liberty of distinguishing that approach against the background of her work. 50

In her history of the theory of ritual, Bell highlights the degree to which studies of ritual

appear to describe the theoretical behaviors of their formulators rather than the concerns of the

sample populations on whose practices they are based. 51 To distance herself from this, Bell rejects fixed categories of “ritual” and “non-ritual” in favor of a continuum of “ritualization” in which practices differentially participate. This process of ritualization, Bell suggests, is the imbuing of certain practices with a distinct sense of value that sets them apart from other modes of action. The goals vary, but the results of ritualized actions, Bell states, are accomplished through means different from those perceived by the actors driving them; in other words, ritual is wrong about how it does what it does. 52

In theory, ritualization can take any form that distinguishes the practices on which it

operates from others; in practice, Bell states, it tends to involve formality, repetition, and other

indicators commonly associated with ceremony. 53 A common quality of all ritualized action as a form of practice, however, is its exercise of “redemptive hegemony” -- its capacity to offer strategic benefit to actors who submit to its particularly constructed vision of the world and its

Zhou ritual, especially with respect to explanations of the changes referred to as the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform” and to the possible relationship of Western Zhou practices with material preserved in the received Book of Songs; see Martin Kern “Bronze Inscriptions, the Shijing , and the Shangshu : The Evolution of the Ancestral Sacrifice during the Western Zhou,” in John Lagerwey and Marc Kalinowski, eds., Early Chinese Religion, Part 1: Shang through Han (1250 BC to 220 AD), Leiden: Brill, 2009, 179-80; Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 295 n. 7. This work makes occasional reference to Tambiah’s, particularly with respect to the incorporation of different registers of communication into ritual event assemblies. However, the “sociology of associations” aimed at herein takes all efforts at the definition of groups, ritual or not, as performative; see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 34. While the performative definition of ritual offers valuable insight for understanding how particular ritual actions worked, then, it cannot serve as a diagnostic criterion of ritual in this work. 50 This formulation is described in Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice , New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. 51 Ibid., 47-54. 52 Ibid., 73-4, 108-10, 140-2. I take issue, however, with Bell's frequent personification of the concept of “ritualization.” 53 Ibid., 91-3.

17 possible modes of action. 54 This “acceptance” Bell envisions in line with Foucault's theorization

of power as a necessarily participatory process; it allows for the idea of involuntary action and

resistance as an acknowledgment of hegemony. 55

Western Zhou events often combined individual actions of greater or lesser “ritual”

nature into ritual event assemblies. Bell's vision of ritual as a quality rather than a distinct

category of action provides a valuable model for understanding the inclusion of events of greater

or lesser degrees of formality in these assemblies.56 Also of key use is Bell’s recognition that

ritual action is not a simple matter of acceptance or rejection, but allows agents to select from

differing degrees and flavors of participation; the case studies in chapters 4 and 5 will show that

soliciting different varieties of participation from different parties was part of the Zhou royal-

ritual project. I differ from Bell, however, with respect to her understanding of the

characteristics and goals of ritual action. To put it simply, I hold that the valuation of certain

modes of action as compared with others is a potential goal rather than a diagnostic quality of

ritual.

The ritualization process, I contend, is characterized by the regularization of actions

beyond the constraints imposed by physical requirements in order to imbue those actions with

constitutional or instantiative power. Such regularization may include the formalization of

language, patterns of movement, dress, and consumption behaviors, or it may call for an

enforced form of spontaneity, as Bell points out is the case with certain anti-formalistic modes of

54 Ibid., 83-6. Here Bell comes close to describing ritual as a vehicle of Callon’s processes of interessement and enrollment. 55 See Bell, 199-204, 206-8. 56 Examples of Western Zhou ritual event assemblies appear throughout this work; however, for the most direct consideration of the “event assembly” concept, see the discussion of the Mai fangzun event in chapter 5. My thinking on these assemblies is influenced strongly by van Gennep, who placed heavy emphasis on the sequences of ritual actions; see Arnold van Gennep, Les rites de passage , Paris: Libraire Critique Émile Nourry, 1909, 13, 275.

18 devotional practice. 57 In either case, it creates strong criteria of participation and intentional rejection, both of which attitudes can play important roles in the practice of ritual. This work thus takes repetition, formalism, and other forms of regularization to be basic criteria rather than common modes of ritual. 58

Regularization plays a variety of roles in the perception, performance, and perpetuation

of ritual action. When conducted openly and consciously, it can force negotiated participation of

the sort that Foucault considers the necessary manifestation of power; 59 by enforcing and/or conforming to regularized expectations for modes of action to greater or lesser degrees, participants instantiate their perceptions of authoritative relationships. Through the capacity of embodied action to shape the unconscious dispositions of actors, regularization can cultivate particular ways of acting, thinking, and seeing, thereby encouraging the further framing of actions in terms of its rule set. 60 Each of these tendencies is visible in the sources on which this

project is based.

Perhaps the most notable benefit of regularization, however, is its capacity to imbue

action with a reassuring impression of effectiveness. Fraser long ago noted the phenomenon of

“sympathetic magic,” the human tendency to imagine that entities that resemble each other can

affect each other. 61 Regularization extends this principle into the realm of interpersonal

relationships (or, in many cases, perceived relationships between humans and imperceptible

entities). Regularized acts of communication instantiate such relationships in controlled form,

57 Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice , 92. 58 Ibid., 91-3. 59 According to Bell; see ibid., 191-204. See also Michel Foucault, “The Subject and Power,” in Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, eds., Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983, 208-26, cited therein. 60 Bourdieu's enumeration of practice theory is an expression of this idea; see Pierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice , New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977, 72-3. 61 Sir James George Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion , New York: Macmillan, 1951 (1922), 12-55.

19 creating idealized versions of exchanges between parties. In doing so, they invoke the tendency to imagine that like entities – in this case, ritually envisioned and “real” relationships – can affect each other. The result is a tendency of ritual acts of communication to seem particularly effective – a “privileging,’ as Bell would have it – based on the same principles behind sympathetic magic. 62 The instantiation of a relationship during a ceremony creates an ideal

model of the relationship that seems to operate on the real relationship itself. The fact that

interactions between living human agents during ceremonies may constitute a heavy proportion

of the total set of relations between the agents involved, and that the participation of those parties

in the ceremony requires a very real instance of the negotiation of their relative statuses, lends

credence to this impression. 63

A further contributor to the perceived effectiveness of regularized action is the tendency of humans to perceive intentionality operating in their surroundings. Alfred Gell has pointed out that the experience of living in a world dominated by human action leads agents, in a process distinct from empirical explanations for phenomena, to conceive of the causes of those phenomena in terms of intentionality. 64 Regularized actions tap into this tendency by virtue of both their contrast with less controlled modes of action and their capacity for habituation.

Recognizing that a ritual prescribes a certain way of performing an action selected from a set of options, participants are to some degree naturally inclined to conceive of the forces prescribing the accepted method. In an immediate sense, participants may recognize nexuses of temporal authority as the driving force behind regularization; that is, they may believe that they perform rituals in a particular way because a king, priest, sage, or state says to do so. They may also explain the regularity of action in terms of models of “tradition” and “antiquity” as justifying

62 See Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice , 74. 63 See Alfred Gell, Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998, 100-1. 64 Ibid.

20 factors, models which can also bear weight in other, less regularized situations. Expressions of both these conceptions are ubiquitous in early Chinese sources. 65 Neither of them offers a complete explanation, however; there remains the question of why the king, priests, ancestors, or

gods prescribe a certain mode of action in a certain situation. Intentions have motivations, and

so the perceived intentionality of the agents behind a ritualized action must be explained. In the

absence of a better option, the most natural explanation for adopting a particular method is

simply that it works – would the agents driving the selection intentionally choose ineffective

methods? The mere fact that ritual actions require special effort to perform seems to militate

against that possibility. This assumed intentionality, then, gives ritual actions a heightened sense

of effectiveness based on external causes, i.e., the assumption of effective knowledge on the part

of agents driving the format of ritual actions.

The process of habituation that regularized action creates in embodied agents creates an

internal complement to this external motivator. Giddens and Bourdieu have both noted the

tendency of repeated action to create dispositions in participants that influence both their further

conduct and their ways of conceiving of that conduct. 66 In the absence of detailed conceptions of habituation, the tendency to envision a source of and reason for those dispositions allows them to act as additional evidence for the efficacy of modes of ritual action fixed through regularization; the participants will tend to experience certain ritual activities as “the right thing to do” based on the dispositions inculcated in them by their previous experiences.

65 These two conceptions are by no means mutually exclusive, but are typically bound up with each other. The attribution of the creation of the rites to the Duke of Zhou and the tradition of deference to the “way of the former kings” may be considered as examples. 66 This is the point of contact between Giddens and Bourdieu, who see these dispositions as dependent on “the monitored character of the ongoing flow of social life” and “the structures constitutive of a particular type of environment,” respectively; see Bourdieu, 72-3, and Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration , Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984, 1-3. For a consideration of “mental dispositions” as intertwined with, rather than mere background to, cultural phenomena, see the theory of mind in Clifford Geertz, “The Growth of Culture and the Evolution of Mind,” in The Interpretation of Cultures , New York: Basic Books, 1973, 55-83, esp. 82-3.

In Bell's terms, such actors have achieved “ritual mastery” in their capacity to recognize and act within parameters associated with particular modes of ritual practice. 67 This form of

embodied “mastery,” I hold, is perceptible to the actors involved and can itself become an object

of consideration and analysis. The approach to li as “the rites” espoused in the Analects is just such an analysis, an explanation of the phenomenon formulated as an attempt to re-establish the value of certain regularized actions in a time and place in which much of the ideological and political framework that once bolstered them had broken down. 68 The period under

consideration in this project, however, saw the promulgation of that framework, and the

sensation of habituation could still be perceived by some, if not all, agents as an additional prop

supporting it.

0.4.4: Material objects, social objects, and “rite names”

By far the majority of the material in the following pages is drawn from inscriptions cast

into ritual bronze vessels. These inscriptions are the most extensive source of contemporary

information on the Western Zhou period; but they and the bronzes they adorn are also objects

that required resources and expertise to produce, took up space among the trappings of ancestral

cults, and were seen and used by people. This work is therefore in need of a theoretical approach

to the varieties of materiality represented by Western Zhou ritual bronzes, the inscriptions they

bore, and the ritual events recorded in those inscriptions.

Latour provides us with a starting point in his considerations of the roles played by non-

humans in the performation of collectives. 69 The following pages will regularly refer to

67 See Bell, 107-8, 114-5. 68 For an introduction to the concept of li 禮 in the Analects , see Nivison, “The Classical Philosophical Writings,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China, 755. 69 Ibid., 63-86.

22 inscribed bronzes as actors in the formation of Zhou identity, “taking up the relay” in order to bring specific ritual events to wider audiences through their use in ancestral cult activities. This approach requires the acceptance of the controversial assertion that non-human objects can “act,” exercise agency, despite their lack of consciousness and intentionality. 70 This view may, I think, have been less controversial to elites of the late Shang and early Western Zhou, given their interest in imbuing ritual bronze vessels with a gaze. 71

The inscriptions of such vessels recreated moments of contact between the Western Zhou

kings (and other power-holders) and subordinate or allied elites. In doing so, they carried

ideological messages about the role of the royal house in the Zhou collective. This is particularly

the case when inscriptions record the details of royal ancestral offerings and what I refer to as

“rites of figuration,” rituals depicting the king as a specialized type of actor driving particular

aspects of Zhou elite life. 72 I have therefore found it helpful to engage these inscriptions in terms

of the assertions put forth by Demarrais, Castillo, and Earle in their classic article on

“materialized ideology.” 73 The enormous technical, human, and political resources invested in

their production bespeak a deliberate selection of bronzes as a preferred marker of status and

embodiment of ideas about elite identity. The following pages will address the question of what

gave bronzes an advantage as a “power strategy.” 74

If bronzes and their inscriptions were materializations of ideology, the ritual events they

commemorate were as well. They combined physical bodies, specially constructed buildings,

sumptuous prestige goods, food and drink, and even bronze vessels themselves into compressed

70 Ibid., 70-1, 76. 71 This point is explored at greater length in chapter 1. 72 I derive the term “figuration” from Latour, who uses it to describe the process by which the webs of associations connecting various phenomena are packaged into coherent entities that can be said to “act.” See Latour, Reassembling the Social , 52-5. “Rites of figuration” are discussed at length in chapter 3 of this work. 73 DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, “Ideology, Materialization, and Power Strategies,” Current Anthropology 37.1 (Feb. 1996), 15-31. 74 Ibid., 16.

23 narratives instantiating particular visions of integration into the Zhou collective. 75 Different

combinations and substitutions of these material elements, and of the particular actions that they

performed and to which they were subjected, created very different visions of the benefits of

affiliation with the Zhou. 76 Even more than material elements, the actions that connected them, and the terms denoting those actions, could be strung together in sequences or taken up and adapted to different purposes by different parties and at different times. Their flexibility underlies a debate about the viability of using individual ancient terms to characterize Shang and

Zhou rituals. 77

In this work, I have not hesitated to consider specific “rite names.” Individual characters designated meaningful, coherent concepts to the people that produced ancient bronzes, and in order to understand bronze inscriptions and the rituals they described, we cannot avoid treating them as such. Their selection and ordering in overall ritual events, however, can be as meaningful as the individual terms themselves in understanding the strategies of association that

Zhou rituals sought to implement. Drawing on the analogy of the “collective” in actor-network theory, I view these events as “ritual assemblies,” collectives of heightened significance, made up of people, places, things, and actions, that at once depicted and accomplished the process of enrolling participants in the Zhou group identity. 78

In an influential essay on differences in the diagnosis of anemia, Annemarie Mol and

John Law characterize that disease state as a “social object,” an entity engaging in interactions like any other, but with fluid boundaries and varying characteristics depending on the people

75 On the collective, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 74-5. Demarrais, Castillo, and Earle recognize rituals events as a form of materialization; see p. 17, “Means and Forms of Materialization.” 76 Chapter 5 offers a few examples of these contrasts. 77 For a retrospective on and criticism of the use of the “rite name” ( jiming 祭名) as a standard classification in the study of early Chinese ritual, see Liu Yuan, Shang Zhou jizuli yanjiu , Beijing: Shangwu, 2004, 19-31. 78 See notes 40 and 45.

24 engaging with it. 79 This work, and chapter 2 in particular, approaches individual ritual techniques, or “rite names,” as social objects in this manner – coherent entities in their own right, but with flexible borders; sometimes adapted and modified by non-royal elites in particular to serve different interests; and, above all, able to be manipulated, reordered, and combines in order to produce ritual assemblies with varying narratives of relationship to the Zhou identity. Both these individual ritual techniques and the ritual event assemblies that they made up were

“materialized ideology” in Demarrais’s, Castillo’s, and Earle’s sense; through their engagement with and of objects, and in particular through their depiction in inscriptions, they formed part of the “relay” or “zigzag” Latour points out between human and non-human entities as part of the formation of groups. 80

0.5: Ritual in the inscriptions: prior work and present standpoint

In the Western Zhou case, the difficulty of isolating “ritual” is compounded by the

developmental state of the writing system used in contemporary sources, the relative paucity and

indeterminate dates of received textual materials, and the patchy condition of the archaeological

record. The distinction between ceremony names, names of specific ritual actions, terms for

“ceremony” in general, and other actions appearing as incidental parts of ritual event descriptions

is muddled at best. Moreover, many relevant terms appear in the inscriptions with other

meanings, whether due to dual usages or as loan characters. 81

Prior efforts at the description of Western Zhou ritual in the inscriptions have provided fruitful ground for the roots of this project. In 1936, Chen Mengjia published a survey and

79 Annemarie Mol and John Law, “Regions, Networks, and Fluids: Anaemia and Social Topology,” Social Studies of Science 24.4. (1994), 641-71, esp. 659-64. 80 Latour, Reassembling the Social, 75, 78. 81 For example, the character yue 龠 is sometimes read as the rite name yue 禴, sometimes as yue 籥, “pipes,” and sometimes as he 龢, a musical term; see the discussion of yue 禴 in chapter 2.

25 characterization of the relationship between Shang and Zhou ritual practices based on bronze inscriptions and the then-young oracle bones. This article included a list of specific names of ceremonies that Chen observed in the sources. 82 A 1989 article by Liu Yu offers a similar, more up-to-date list and a more detailed term-by-term analysis. 83 In identifying ritual techniques for the following analysis, I have drawn on the lists furnished by these two sources, supplementing them with additional phenomena observed in my study and by other scholars in other publications.84 In particular, I have devoted considerable space to the consideration of ritual techniques with no demonstrable religious component, which receive less attention in those works due to their religious focus. In the chapters that follow, I characterize the use of these techniques, both individually and in combination, in the formation and negotiation of individual and group identities among Western Zhou elites. The results, I believe, show the value of considering religious and political ritual together in the early Chinese context.

I have made an effort to draw the distinction between ritual practices and other types of actions as clearly as possible based on the criteria discussed above, but errors undoubtedly remain, for which I ask the reader’s indulgence. When possible, I have tried to err on the side of inclusivity. There are a few terms addressed in the following pages which may not refer to

Western Zhou ritual techniques at all; I indicate my misgivings with respect to these terms on an individual basis. Two such terms, guan 祼 and chai 祡, receive detailed treatments in Appendix

0.6: Source materials

82 Chen Mengjia, “Guwenzi zhong de Shang Zhou jisi,” Yanjing xuebao 18-19 (1935.1), 91-155. 83 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli,” Kaogu xuebao 1989.4, 495-522. 84 In particular, for the observation of the existence of the plowing ritual and the foal-catching ritual, I have relied on Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 71 and 153, respectively.

This project seeks to characterize the ritual practices of the Western Zhou period based on contemporary sources, without imposing the assumptions of consistency and classicism inherent in the later ritual texts. I have therefore selected source material with some consideration, taking care to use only materials of definite or likely Western Zhou date as evidence of Zhou practices. Very occasional digressions into material of slightly later or, more often, of earlier date provide evidence of historical, linguistic, and cultural connections between the Zhou state and its cultural predecessors and inheritors. Care is taken to distinguish this material from the overall characterizations of Western Zhou terms, ideas, and practices.

As the only textual sources that can be verifiably dated to the Western Zhou period, the era of the establishment of Zhou cultural hegemony, bronze inscriptions form the core of this project. Present-day scholars are fortunate in having unprecedented access to a large volume of these inscriptions, many of which can be definitively dated to the Western Zhou period based on their content, the formal characteristics of the bronzes bearing them, and, in some cases, the archaeological context of their excavation. Two published compendia, the Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng and the Jin chu Yin Zhou jinwen jilu are the main sources for bronze inscriptions, between them containing in excess of 13,000 such, of which about half are products of the

Western Zhou period. 85 Most of the bronzes considered here appear in those two works, but I

have included occasional discussions of bronzes, such as the Zuoce Wu he , which have been

discovered more recently and so do not appear in the collections. 86

85 Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, ed., Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng , 18 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984-94 (abbreviated as JC ); Liu Yu and Lu Yan, eds., Jin chu Yin Zhou jinwen jilu , Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002 (abbreviated as JL ). Between the two of them, these sources contain 13,317 inscriptions; see Bureaucracy , 2. These as well as many more recently discovered inscriptions are now accessible electronically through the Academia Sinica’s bronze database (see below). That source identifies 6076 of its inscriptions as products of the Western Zhou (figure retrieved in April 2012). 86 On the Zuoce Wu he , see the discussion of the foal-catching rite in chapter 3, section 3.2.3.

Recent years have seen the introduction of an invaluable tool for the analysis of this extensive corpus: the Yin Zhou jinwen ji qingtongqi ziliaoku 殷周金文暨青銅器資料庫, a detailed database of bronzes and their inscriptions maintained by the Bronze Script Workshop of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica. 87 Its full spectrum of search parameters allows rapid and thorough consideration of particular points concerning the inscriptional record in a way not previously possible. The AS database is inclusive of JC; I have thus relied on it as my primary source for the JC bronzes. It now includes many bronzes discovered after the printing of both JC and JL ; whenever possible, I give references to the AS database for such

recently discovered bronzes, for the reader’s convenience.

While the script of the Western Zhou inscriptions is closely related to that of modern

Chinese, it does contain many character forms that are no longer in common use, as well as many idiosyncrasies of grammar and usage that distinguish it from the classical Chinese of later periods. Both transcription and interpretation of the inscriptions thus admit of varying opinions.

For the sake of consistency and ease of reference, the transcriptions of bronze inscriptions in this work all follow those given in the AS database except where noted. I have produced custom font characters to replace those used in the AS transcriptions for characters that do not appear in modern character sets. These font characters follow the AS database transcriptions except where otherwise noted; any errors in such characters are my responsibility. Images of individual characters are derived from the rubbing images in the AS database as well. On the interpretation of bronze inscriptions, I have referred most frequently to Shirakawa Shizuka’s monumental

87 Yin Zhou jinwen ji qingtongqi ziliaoku (“Digital Archives of Bronze Images and Inscriptions”), accessible at http://www.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/~bronze/ ; abbreviated as (“the AS database”).

28 work, Kinbun tsuushaku, as well as Ma Chengyuan's interpretations in Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwenxuan .88

Bronze inscriptions are the most abundant source of contemporary textual information on the Zhou state, but they are not the only one. The Shang, predecessors of the Zhou, produced voluminous records of pyromantic divination, inscribed on the shells of turtles and the bones of oxen. Most such “oracle bones” were concerned with the divinatory activities of the king, whose ancestral cult formed a vital part of the Shang state apparatus. 89 Many of the key terms on

Western Zhou ritual, and especially that of the early Western Zhou, had their origins in these

records. 90 They are therefore occasionally referred to in this work to provide background on the connections between Shang and Zhou practices, though never as evidence of the character of the

Zhou rites themselves.

However, it is now recognized that the Zhou maintained a tradition of pyromantic recording similar to that of the Shang for some time, as oracle bones similar to those of the

Shang have been uncovered in building foundations within the Plain of Zhou. 91 The content of these records is of direct relevance to the characterization of early Western Zhou ritual practices, and so the discussion draws on these inscriptions as necessary. My main source thereof is the

88 Shanghai bowuguan Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan bianxiezu, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwenxuan , 4 vols., Beijing: Wenwu, 1986. 89 Chinese sources on the Shang oracle bones are too numerous to list here; one still-classic example is Guo Moruo, Bu ci tong zuan, Dongjing: Wenjiutang, 1933 (reprint: Beijing, Kexue, 1983). The main compendium thereof is Guo Moruo and Hu Houxuan, eds., Jiaguwen heji , 13 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980. The definitive work in English remains David N. Keightley, Sources of Shang History: The Oracle-Bone Inscriptions of Ancient China , Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978. 90 For an early consideration of this fact, see Chen Mengjia, “Guwenzi zhong de Shang Zhou jisi.” 91 On the discovery of these bones, see Shaanxi sheng Zhouyuan kaogudui, “Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi faxian jianbao,” Wenwu 1979.10, 27-37, and “Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun faxian Zhou chu jiaguwen,” Wenwu 1979.10, 38-43, 100-3. For background on their study, see Cao Wei, Zhouyuan jiaguwen , Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2002, 1-9. Edward L. Shaughnessy, “Zhouyuan Oracle-Bone Inscriptions: Entering the Research Stage?,” Early China 11-12 (1985-1987), 146-63, offers an English-language presentation of the subject.

29 volume Zhouyuan jiaguwen , which offers high-quality images and conservative transcriptions of the Zhouyuan oracle bones.92

The analysis of both the dating and the content of individual inscribed bronzes benefits

from an understanding of the material circumstances of their deposition and discovery; and the

patterns of deposition of bronze vessels have important implications as to their customary use,

the psychological relationships between vessels and their commissioners, and their role in the

formation of both individual and lineage identities. Archaeological materials are therefore of

prime importance to this work. The following discussion draws on the published reports and

monographs for several key sites of the Western Zhou period in its characterizations of the use of

bronzes and the formation of the Zhou group identity. 93 Many other archaeological reports are considered by way of background for the analysis of individual bronzes.

In keeping with the purpose of this project, received textual material has been included only with the greatest caution. The dating of received texts is extremely complex, involving questions of the original production of a text, possible later revisions of both its content and its vocabulary, canonization of particular versions of a text as compared with others, and physical transmission. It is beyond the scope of this work to establish either a full methodology for the dating of pre-Qin texts or a full set of datings for received texts of potential Western Zhou provenance. Still, there are certain texts, or portions of texts, that are widely considered likely

92 Cao Wei, Zhouyuan jiaguwen . Another valuable source, occasionally consulted in preparing this work, is Xu Xitai, Zhouyuan jiaguwen zongshu, Xi’an: Sanqin, 1987. 93 The main sites considered include Baoji (Yu), Gaojiabao (Ge), Liulihe (Yan), Tianma-Qucun (Jin), Zhangjiapo, Zhougongmiao, and the Zhouyuan region. On these see Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng, Baoji yu guo mudi , 2 vols., Beijing: Wenwu, 1988; Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo, Gaojiabao Ge guo mu , Xi’an: Sanqin, 1994; Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo, Liulihe Xi Zhou Yan guo mudi, 1973-1977 , Beijing: Wenwu, 1995; Beijing Daxue kaoguxi Shang Zhou zu, Shanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo, and Zou Heng, Tianma Qucun, 1980-1989 , 4 vols., Beijing: Kexue, 2000;Zhangjiapo ; Xu Tianjin, “Zhougongmiao yizhi de kaogu suohuo ji suosi,” Wenwu 2006.8; Chen Quanfang, Zhouyuan yu Zhou wenhua , Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1988.

30 products of the Western Zhou, the content of which has in some cases been correlated with the bronze inscriptions. 94

The use of received texts as direct evidence in this work is limited to these materials.

Most frequently referred to are the gao , or “Announcement,” chapters of the Shangshu , purporting to record various speeches from the early stages of formation of the Zhou state. 95 The

“Zhou song” section of the Shijing , a collection of poems traditionally associated with the ritual practices of the Zhou, provides a small amount of material as well, as does the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu , for which Shaughnessy has convincingly argued as a product of the early

Western Zhou period. 96 The Bamboo Annals is also occasionally adduced for supporting or

supplementary evidence on the chronological distribution of particular rites, though its value as a

source on the character of ritual practices is minimal. 97 Beyond these core textual sources, later texts such as the Guoyu and the Sanli are occasionally cited as evidence on the later use of particular terms, allowing the contextualization of Western Zhou practices in the overall history of early China. 98 These texts are never relied on as sources on the Western Zhou period itself.

0.7: Organization of the work

94 See Michael Nylan, The Five Confucian Classics , New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001, 133-5, for a discussion of this issue with respect to the Shangshu . 95 The gao , or “announcement,” chapters are likely products of the Western Zhou period; see Shaughnessy, “Shang shu (Shu ching),” in ECT, 368-89, esp. 379-80. On the relative dating of Shangshu chapters, see also Nylan, 133. Chapter 1 of this work contains a brief discussion of a portion of the “Jin teng” chapter of the Shangshu ; this is to note an ambiguity in its dating based on the use of a particular term. 96 Edward L. Shaughnessy, Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Confucian Classics , Albany, NY; State University of New York Press, 1997, 31-68. On the “Zhou song,” see 165-96, esp. 165-6, which suggests a Western Zhou date for many of the Hymns. Nylan is somewhat less sanguine about the dating of the “Zhou song,” though she does suggest a possible Western Zhou date for some Hymns; see p. 84-6. 97 Based on the investigations by David Nivison and Shaughnessy, I am confident that the Current Bamboo Annals has value as a source on the Western Zhou period. See Shaughnessy, Before Confucius , 69-100; David Nivison, “The Dates of Western Chou,” HJAS 43.2 (1983), 481-580; “Chu shu chi nien,” in ECT , 39-47, esp. 42-3. 98 For the most part, I rely on the determinations of the chapter authors of Michael Loewe, ed., Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993, with respect to dating. On the Shangshu and the Yizhoushu in particular, I have also followed Zhu Fenghan and Xu Yong, Xian Qin shi yanjiu gaiyao , Tianjin: Tianjin jiaoyu, 1996, 41-3.

Chapter 1 of this work characterizes the shared assumptions of Zhou ritual and their distribution throughout the period. The chapter begins with a characterization of the chronological distribution of kinship terms throughout the inscriptions of the period and their roles in the prevalent models of Zhou elite identity. It proceeds to a discussion of ideas about the relationships between living and dead lineage members and the royal house underlying Zhou elite performance of ancestral offerings and their records in the inscriptions. Noting the connection of non-royal houses to the Zhou kings through “nexus ancestors,” the chapter proposes a model of bronze inscriptions as embodying the “distributed personhood” of the Zhou king in the sense put forth by Alfred Gell. 99

Chapter 2 conducts a comprehensive analysis of the records of ancestral offerings

contained in the inscriptions. Characterizing those offerings as “social objects” in the sense put

forth by Mol and Law, it notes the differential use of various ancestral rites by royal and non-

royal Zhou elites. It addresses the use of royal ancestral rites as the anchors of royal gatherings

during the early and middle Western Zhou, the royal sponsorship of livestock offerings among

non-royal elites during the era of Kings Zhao-Mu, and the disappearance of royal ancestral rites

from the inscriptions after King Mu’s reign. Noting the differential adoption of ancestral rites

with Shang origins among non-royal elites, the chapter shows that the performance of ancestral

offerings among non-royal elites during the second half of the Western Zhou period provided the

basis for many later characterizations of Western Zhou ritual.

Addressing the ritual figuration of the Zhou king, chapter 3 includes discussions of the

“Great Rite” ( da feng/li ) conducted on the biyong pond and the ritual ploughing of fields and

catching of foals by the Zhou king. It shows that the end of the early Western Zhou and the

beginning of the middle Western Zhou saw the emergence of rites characterizing the Zhou king

99 Gell, Art and Agency, 102-4, 230-51.

32 as the fundamental source of resources vital to the well-being of the state. These rites, the chapter argues, sought to naturalize and thus bolster the authority of the king in response to a conjunction of events that compromised the earlier vision of the king as the leader of a military coalition.

Chapter 4 is devoted to ritual instantiations of patronage. Examining the three most visible patronage ceremonies in the inscriptions—the mieli , or “recounting of merits;” royally sponsored archery meets and their institutional infrastructure; and the middle-late Western Zhou appointment ritual – it relates the changes in ritual patronage over the course of the period to the waning military power of the Zhou royal house and its efforts to secure a finer and more institutionalized degree of control over the Zhou heartland.

Chapter 5 examines the changing role of ritual in the formation and reformation of Zhou identity over the course of the Western Zhou period. It suggests that key differences between the ritual of the Shang and Zhou were in place at the beginning of the period, resulting from the different use that the Zhou made of Shang ritual techniques in a political environment of expansion and incorporation. It characterizes the reigns of Kings Zhao-Mu as a transitional period during which major events based around Shang-style offerings to the royal ancestors gave way to new ritual formulations of the relationship between the king and various elements of the state. The reign of King Mu, it shows, was the era of greatest diversity in Western Zhou royal ritual, when a crisis of military power drove the king to intensify ritual efforts at group identity maintenance in order to counterbalance the failing of the royal house as military patron and war leader. Noting the suite of changes in the descriptions of Zhou ritual in the post-King Mu inscriptions, the chapter offers additional evidence on the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform” seen by some scholars in the Western Zhou archaeological record.

The conclusion to this work situates the analysis in the overall milieu of work on the

Western Zhou period and suggests directions for future research. Appendix 1 considers two additional terms, guan 祼 and chai 祡, of possible importance to the characterization of Western

Zhou ritual. Appendix 2 gathers important tables for the reader’s reference.

CHAPTER 1 LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS: KINSHIP, ANCESTORS, BRONZES, AND THE BASIS OF ZHOU RITUAL

The king said, “ Gong ! I, the young son, will retire and take up my rule at Zhou. I command you to remain behind. The guidance and governance of the [peoples of the] four directions have not yet been settled through ancestral ritual…”

Shangshu , “Luo gao” 1

1.1: Introduction

According to the orthodox understanding of Zhou society, the Zhou elite were organized

into kinship conglomerates based on patrilineal descent. These kinship groups constituted the

basic functional unit of Zhou society and the forum in which Zhou elite individuals could

establish identities for themselves based on hierarchical relations with other members of their

lineages. 2 Standing within a lineage constituted the most commonly recognized expression of

status, and recognition of that status among individuals outside the context of one's own kinship

group was a key element of the shared culture known as “Zhou.” The classic historical narrative

of the rebellion of the stewards of Cai and Guan against their younger brother, the Duke of Zhou,

upon his assumption of regency over the fledgling King Cheng, son of the eldest brother King

Wu, in the early days of Zhou supremacy can be read as a manifestation of the ideological import

of this model. 3

As might be expected, the Zhou elite relied heavily on ritual activities to maintain the

personal and cultural significance of their kinship model. The classic Zhou ritual activity par

excellence -- the casting, inscription, and use of bronze food vessels – was one facet of a whole

1 Shisanjing , 216. 2 For the classical statement of the zongfa lineage system, see Liji , “Da zhuan,” Shisanjing , 1506-9. For analyses of the phenomenon in the context of the Zhou period, see Zhao Guangxian, Zhou dai shehui bianxi , Beijing: Renmin, 1982, 99-110; Yang Kuan, Xi Zhou shi , 426-52; Western Zhou Civilization , 163-71. 3 Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 132-3.

35 host of ritual activities, including feasting, devotional offerings, sacrifice, impersonation, and commemoration, that allowed the constant construction and reconstruction of patrilineal kinship groups and that established and maintained them as indispensable aspects of enculturated Zhou life. As background for the rest of the work, this chapter therefore examines the connections between Western Zhou royal politics, elite kinship relations, and the production and use of inscribed bronze vessels. Through a survey of the terminology of Western Zhou kinship organization appearing in bronze inscriptions, the first part of the chapter characterizes royal interests as operating through, and thus motivating acceptance of, an understanding of the patrilineal descent group model as the key unit of Zhou elite society, as manifest especially in the concept of the zong 宗 (temple/temple lineage). It shows that the use of kinship terminology as a marker of identity expanded over the course of the period, suggesting demographic expansion and an increased desire for differentiation between individual elites.

The second part of the chapter focuses on the privileged role of bronze vessels, and especially those bearing inscriptions, in Western Zhou ritual. Drawing on Alfred Gell’s model of

“distributed personhood,” it argues that the ethic of presence underlying the production of ritual bronzes and their inscriptions extended the agency of the Zhou king into the group interactions of individual lineages and connected the royal authority with the sacerdotal authority of lineage ancestors. The personal identification of lineage members with their ancestors, and in particular with “nexus ancestors” who established model relations with the Zhou royal house, was a key element of this process. The natural tendency for identification of an individual with the bronzes they produced, the chapter suggests, along with the customary use of sets of vessels in ancestral offerings and feasting activities, promoted a vision of elites as “collective individuals” who both

36 belonged to and iterated their lineages. 4 As the role of kinship identifiers in elite identity

expanded, the introduction of sets of identical vessels expressed this vision; at the same time,

vessel sets created opportunities for individual elites to dominate the symbolic space of the

bronze assemblage and dilute the connection between official recognition and the production of

bronzes.

1.2: Western Zhou kinship terminology and identity formation

In discussions of kinship and social organization in early China, four main terms typically

appear as potential referents to kin group identity: xing 姓, shi 氏, zong 宗, and zu 族. These terms are best known from Eastern Zhou theoretical texts on kinship relations and ritual, 5 but the

concepts they represent did in some cases play important roles in Western Zhou social

organization. The following discussion considers each of these terms/concepts as depicted in the

Western Zhou bronze inscriptions.

1.2.1: Ancestral temples and ancestral lines (Zong 宗)

The term zong is associated with the early Chinese cult of deceased patrilineal ancestors

and the core model of patrilineal kinship and descent on which it was based. Of the various

terms commonly used to refer to kinship groups and related concepts in early China, zong maintains the most consistent pattern of usage throughout the early period. It appears in a few

4 On the concept of the “collective individual,” see Dumont, Religion, Politics, and Society in the Individualistic Universe , cited in Robert J. Foster, “Nurture and Force-feeding: Mortuary Feasting and the Construction of Collective Individuals in a New Ireland Society,” American Ethnologist 17.3 (1990), 432. 5 In particular, the Liji . See Liji, “Sangfu xiaoji,” Shisanjing, 1495, and “Da zhuan,” 1508. Cited in Falkenhausen, 66, 66 n. 62.

Shang-period inscriptions in three main uses: as a term or descriptor for a type of location,6 as an

adjective modifying terms for vessels (usually yi 彝), 7 and, probably, as a component of a

personal name. 8 It is more ubiquitous in the longer Western Zhou inscriptions, wherein its meanings are essentially similar but much more broadly applied. 9

1.2.1.1: Zong 宗 as location in the Western Zhou inscriptions

In the Western Zhou inscriptions, zong occasionally appears on its own as a term

indicating ancestral temples belonging or dedicated to specific individuals. This is the case, for

example, in the inscription of the early Western Zhou vessel called the Shenzi Ta guigai 沈子它

簋蓋 (4330): 10

它曰：拜 首，敢  卲（昭）告 （朕）吾考，令乃鴅沈子乍（作）綩于周公宗，陟二公，不敢不綩。 Ta said, “[I] bow and strike my head; [I] dare to clasp my hands 11 and brilliantly make announcement to my deceased father, saying, ‘Your relative 12 Shenzi has been commanded to perform X 13 in the ancestral temple of the Duke of Zhou, to send up [offerings] to the Two Dukes, and not to dare fail to X.;”

6 See the Zuoce Feng ding 作冊豊鼎 (2711) and the Shu Ling fangyi 戍鈴方彝 (9894). The latter describes itself as “a vessel for Ding Temple” ( ding zong yi 丁宗彝); I am indebted to Li Feng for this observation. 7 See the Bingfu Geng zhi 父庚觚 (7281) and the two Bing jue 爵 (9056-7). 8 See the Zong X Ren jue 宗人爵 (8803). 9 As of April 4, 2012, the AS database lists 165 Western Zhou inscriptions containing the term zong , of which it dates 54 definitively to the early Western Zhou, 46 to the middle Western Zhou, and 58 to the late Western Zhou; the occurrences of the term are thus divided roughly evenly across the corpus of the inscriptions. These figures are not adjusted for duplicate inscriptions, however, of which more may be expected from the late Western Zhou than the other two periods. 10 MWX , 56, and Duandai , 113-5, agree in dating the Shenzi Ta guigai to King Kang, while Daxi , 46-9, assigns it to King Zhao, as do Shirakawa 15.78, 27, and Sackler , 374 (under the name of the Tuo gui ). 11 Following the reading of  adopted in MWX , 57, n. 1. 12 Following the reading of 鴅 adopted in ibid., n. 2. 13 The meaning of the character here transcribed as wan 綩 is unclear. In all likelihood, it indicates a type of offering; see ibid., n. 2.

Here Shenzi is ordered to perform service in a zong associated with the Duke of Zhou, the

famous potentate and regent of the early Western Zhou period. Unfortunately, the content of the

inscription is insufficient to allow us to determine whether Ta/Shenzi claimed any kinship

relation to the Duke of Zhou’s line.

The term appears in a similar sense in the inscription of the Xiaozi Sheng zun 小子生尊

(6001): 14

隹（唯）王南征，才（在）[?] ，王命生辨事[于?] 公宗… When the king campaigned to the south, at [?], the king commanded Sheng to discriminate between [i.e., to handle] affairs [in?] the Duke’s Temple…

Unfortunately, no details are available on the provenance of this bronze, so that the relationship

of the king’s campaign to his command toward Sheng is uncertain; the campaign may simply

have been used as a year-marker. Still, it seems likely that the command took place during the

king’s travels; in which case the inscription probably records a case of the king involving himself

in the internal operations of the ancestral temple of a lineage distant from the center of Zhou

power. 15 At the very least, this inscription shows that the early Western Zhou kings occasionally took an active role in the administration of the patrilineal ancestral cult.

One occurrence of the term by itself, in the middle Western Zhou inscription of the Shi

Zai ding 師鼎 (2830), refers to the use of the zong for offerings to multiple generations of

ancestors: 16

14 MWX, 74, assigns this vessel to the reign of King Zhao, presumably based on its reference to a southern campaign; this dating is plausible based on the illustration of the vessel in Xiqing 8.43. Duandai, 85-7, assigns it to the Cheng-Kang period. Ma concurs that the zong here referred to an ancestral temple; see MWX , 74, n. 2. 15 Without additional information, it is impossible to say whether the “Duke” ( gong 公) to whose zong -temple Sheng was assigned claimed kinship to the Zhou king, or whether the king was involving himself in the administrative affairs of another lineage. 16 A reference to “my august deceased father King Mu" ( zhen huang kao Mu Wang 朕皇考穆王) in the Shi Zai ding inscription dates it unambiguously to the reign of King Gong; see Sources , 111.

17 …敢對王休，用妥（綏）乍（作）公上父，于朕考（庸）<虢> 季易父 宗。 …Zai dares to respond to the king’s beneficence, thereby making a zun -vessel to pacify the Duke High Father with offerings in the orderly ancestral temple of [his] august deceased father Guo Ji Yifuifu.

The syntax of the above passage is difficult, but it appears to say that the zong for which Marshal

Zai had this cauldron produced, in which devotions for an ancestor of his known as the “Duke

High Father” ( Gong Shangfu 公上父) would be performed, was dedicated to Marshal Zai ’s father, named “Father Xi,” probably the head of the Guo Ji branch lineage.18

A more common use of zong is in the compound phrase zongshi 宗室, “ancestral hall.”

This term appears in inscriptions dating throughout the period. 19 One, tha t of the Yin Ji li 尹姞

鬲 (754) , contains another interesting tidbit about the establishment of zong and their status as a point of interaction between the royal house and its client elites through the medium of ancestral ritual. 20 I have translated it here i n its entirety:

17 The transcription of this character follows Li Xueqin, Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu , Beijing: Wenwu, 1990, 95. Offering a possible gloss of da 达 for this char acter, Li suggests that the 宗 may here refer to a side hall of the temple. 18 On th e difficulty of distinguishing between the use of seniority terms to refer to individuals vs. lineages, see David Sena, “Reproducing Society: Lineage and Kinship in Western Zhou China,” Ph.D. dissertation, Uni versity of Chicago, 2005, 123-4; on the Guoji lineage in particular, see ibid., 169 -74. On the Qiangjia bronzes, including the Shi Zai ding, see pp. 155-68. Li Xueqin also suggest s that Shi Zai and his father, Guoji Yi fu, may have belonged to a branch lineage of Gong Shangfu ’s; see Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu , 96; Sena, 166. He connects Shi Zai’s lineage with the ruling family of Western Guo, descended from a younger brother of King Wen and originally assigned to an area near Baoji, Shaanxi; see Li Xueqin, “Xi Zhou zhongqi qingtongqi de zhongyao biaozhi – Zhouyuan Zhuangbai, Qiangjia liang chu qingtongqi jiaocang de zonghe yanjiu, ” Zhongguo lishi bowuguan guankan 1 (1979), 29-36, esp. 31. 19 E.g., the Taibao ding 大保鼎(2372), which the AS database rightly dates to the early Western Zhou; the Yubo ding 伯鼎 (2676), recovered from tomb M2 of the Yu state cemetery at Baoji and probably dating to the late phase of the early Western Zhou or the early part of the middle Western Zhou; and the Zhong Yinfu gui 仲殷父簋 (3964), dated by the AS database to the late Western Zhou, etc.. On the dating of the Yubo ding , see Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng, Baoji Yu guo mudi , Beijing: Wenwu, 1988, 364, 411. 20 Both Shirakawa 72, 800-1, and Duandai 97, 135-6, date this vessel (along with the related vessel, the Gong Ji li ) to the reign of King Zhao. MWX assigns it instead to King Xiao; see 230 -1. The AS database assigns the vessels to the middle Western Zhou, perhaps based on the appearance in the inscr iption of Duke Mu ( Mugong 穆公), who was active during the reign of King Mu; on this point see Bureaucracy , 79, n. 83; 131. Wang, Chen, and Zhang also put forth the Yin Ji and Gong Ji li as standards for their “ li type II.2,” dating them to the early phase

穆公乍（作）尹姞宗室于繇林，隹（唯）六月既生霸乙卯，休天君弗望（忘）穆公聖明  事先王，各于尹姞宗室繇林，君蔑尹姞 ，易（賜）玉五品、馬三匹，拜  首，對揚天君休，用乍（作）寶 。 Duke Mu made an ancestral hall ( zongshi 宗室) for Yin Ji at the woods of Zhou 繇. In the sixth month, after the jishengba moon phase, on the yimao day, the beneficent Consort of Heaven 21 had not forgotten Mugong’s sagely observation and brilliant assistance 22 of the former kings. [The Consort of Heaven] entered the ancestral hall of Yin Ji at the woods of Zhou. The Consort performed the mieli -recounting of merits 23 for Yin Ji and awarded [Yin Ji] five items of jade and three horses. [Yin Ji] bows and strikes her head; [she] dares in response to extol the Heavenly Lord’s beneficence, thereby making a precious vessel.

Given the format of the name Yin Ji in this vessel and of Gong Ji in the related Gong Ji li 公姞鬲

(753), it is almost certain that Yin Ji was the wife of Duke Mu, who established an ancestral hall on her behalf. 24 The basic nature of the event is clear: The Zhou queen came to Yin Ji’s

of the middle Western Zhou; see p. 52. I am inclined to follow this dating, based on the relatively short profile and legs of the vessel, on the appearance of Duke Mu (though others might have borne that title), and on my sense that the administration of King Mu was more likely to have supported the ancestral-ritual activities of an affiliate lineage than was that of King Zhao; on this point see chapter 5. 21 Based on the inscriptions of the Zuoce Huan you 作冊睘卣 (5407) and the Zuoce Huan zun 作冊睘尊 (5989), Chen Mengjia has convincingly argued that the phrase tianjun 天君 was equivalent to wangjiang 王姜, “the king’s [lady of the] Jiang,” referring to the Zhou queen. See Duandai , 61-2, 135. The tianjun is also mentioned in the inscription of the Zhengren ding 征人鼎 (2674), in which she feasts and rewards the zhengren , or “campaign men,” suggesting that certain Zhou queens occasionally took a hand in military as well as religious patronage. 22 Following MWX , 231, n. 2, in reading the character following ming 明 as bi 弼, meaning “to assist.” 23 See chapter 4 for a detailed discussion of the mieli ceremony. 24 See Duandai , 135-7. The inclusion of the clan-name or surname Ji 姞 in Yin Ji’s name suggests that Yin Ji was female; as will be discussed below, Ji is one of a group of terms that occur most frequently associated with female names and that are assumed to refer to exogamic kinship groups. The involvement of women in the ancestral cult as both ancestresses and users of bronzes is well documented in the inscriptions; the classic examples of the former role appear in the inscriptions of the Dong gui 簋 (4322) and the Zuoce Yi you 作冊益卣 (5427), both of which express earnest sentiments toward ancestresses. Elite women made use of bronzes that they commissioned themselves (as described by the inscriptions of the Jimeng Jiang yi 孟姜匜 [10240] and the Meng Ji An yan 孟姬安甗 [910]) as well as bronzes commissioned for them by husbands and fathers (such as the Houshi gui 侯氏簋 [JC 3781], the Bo Baifu gui 伯百父簋 [3920], and the Yin Ji li and Gong Ji li . The main statement on the roles of women in the Western Zhou ancestral cult remains Chen Zhaorong, “Zhou dai funü jisi zhong de diwei – qingtongqi mingwen zhong de xingbie, shenfen yu juese yanjiu zhi yi,” Qinghua xuebao 31.4 (2003), 395-440; on the naming of women in the inscriptions, see Li Zhongcao, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de funü chengwei,” Baoji wenbo 1991.1, 35-9; Landscape and Power , 186 n. 126; see also Chen Zhaorong, “Liang Zhou hunyin guanxi zhong de ‘ying’ he ‘yingqi’ – qingtongqi mingwen zhong de xingbie, shenfen yu juese yanjiu zhi er,” Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 77.2 (2006), 193-278.

41 ancestral temple, built for her by her husband Duke Mu, and rewarded her with both utilitarian goods (i.e., horses) and goods with mainly prestige value (jade items). The reward was justified by the sponsor’s memory of the past service rendered to the royal house by Duke Mu. Its validity was reinforced by its performance in Yin Ji’s ancestral temple ( zong ). Yin Ji’s ancestral temple thus provided a sacerdotal framework for the expression of patronage, serving as a venue through which the Zhou ruling elite could transfer prestige (and thus prestige goods) to Yin Ji’s line.

The conferral of the reward in the ancestral temple allowed the Zhou royal house to re- instantiate itself in a ritual context as a hub of both material wealth and sacerdotal authority, reasserting the dependence of Yin Ji’s household on the Zhou kings for its well-being and privileged position. The iterative, cohesive force of ritually regulated prestige distribution helped counterbalance the status anxiety of the recipients, expressed through the statement that the Zhou royal house would not “forget” the service previously rendered them by the Duke, but would continue to recognize the established position of Yin Ji’s house within the Zhou sociopolitical structure. 25 That the powerful Duke Mu went to the trouble of establishing a dedicated ancestral-ritual space for his wife Yin Ji, at which she subsequently received gifts from the Zhou queen, suggests that royal recognition could motivate more intensive participation in the ancestral cult. In the context of ancestral ritual, the Zhou kings could thus achieve an exercise of participatory power in the vein of Foucault, wherein the control afforded by the ritual

25 Duke Mu was in fact an important figure in the politics of the middle Western Zhou, appearing in the inscriptions of several vessels; he was also the progenitor of the powerful Jing lineage that played a vital role in the patronage relationships of that period. See Landscape and Power , 95 n. 9, 128-9; on the Jing lineage, see Zhu Fenghan, Shang Zhou jiazu xingtai yanjiu , 368-9.

42 system was tempered by the capacity for the controlled to exercise agency by participating in the continuation of the system. 26

The epitome of the zong , and one of its most common uses as a place name, was the locale known as Zongzhou 宗周, or “Ancestral Zhou.” Zongzhou appears in inscriptions dating throughout the Western Zhou period as the primary venue of royal ritual activity. In particular,

Zongzhou was the site of many ancestral rites conducted by the Zhou kings during the first half or so of the Western Zhou period in close imitation of Shang ritual. 27 The precise nature of these rites will be visited in later chapters; here, it will suffice to say that Zongzhou remained the home base of the ancestral ritual of the Zhou royal house throughout the period, as shown in this

28 excerpt from the late-Western-Zhou inscription of the Hu zhong  鐘 (260):

…我隹（唯）司配皇天，王對乍（作）宗周寶鐘… …So that we may govern our mixing with august Heaven, the king in response makes [a set of] precious zhong -bells for Zongzhou….

As the inscriptions reviewed in chapter 2 will show, Zongzhou was the site of a variety of rituals

in which both the Zhou kings and subordinate Zhou elites participated, thus helping to establish

the ancestral cult as a venue of prestige distribution throughout the newly formed Zhou cultural

sphere. 29

1.2.1.2: Zong as a designation for people

26 Michel Foucault and Colin Gordon, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977, New York: Pantheon Books, 1980. Cited in Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, 199-204. 27 On the disappearance of many “Shang-style” rites conducted by kings from the inscriptional record after the first half of the Western Zhou, see Liu Yu, Shang Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli , 514-5. 28 The Hu zhong is sometimes taken to have been commissioned by King Li; see Duandai , 311-4; Sources , 111. 29 On Zongzhou as ritual center, see Landscape and Power , 46. For detailed considerations of the location of Zongzhou relative to the other major centers of Western Zhou royal activity, see Shao Ying, “Zongzhou, Haojing, yu Pangjing,” Kaogu yu wenwu 2006.2, 41-5; Maria Khayutina, “Royal Hospitality and Geopolitical Construction of the Western Zhou Polity,” T’oung Pao 96 (2010), 1-73. Khayutina 6, n. 13, gives an extensive review of sources on the location of Zongzhou.

Some inscriptions use the term zong 宗 as a descriptor for people. An early Western

Zhou example, the He zun 尊 (6014), provides more evidence for the role of the Zhou royal

house in the dissemination of ancestral ritual. 30 I translate it below in full:

隹王初  宅于成周，復爯 （武）王豐，祼自天，才（在）四月丙戌，王 （誥）宗小子于京室，曰：昔才（在）爾考公氏，克（弼）玟（文）王，（肆）玟王受茲 □ □ （大命），隹（唯）（武）王既克大邑商，則廷告于天，曰：余其宅茲中或（國），自之（乂）民，烏虖（乎），爾有唯小子亡戠（識），視于公氏，有爵于天，徹令茍（敬）（享）（哉）。 王龏（恭）德谷（裕）天，順我不每（敏），王咸 （誥）， 易（賜）貝卅朋，用乍（作）□ 公寶  彝。隹（唯）王五祀。 It was when the king first moved to take up residence at Chengzhou, offering rites to King Wu and libations toward Heaven. 31 During the fourth month, on the bingwu day, the king made an announcement to the sons of the lineage at the Jing Hall, saying, “Of old, in the days when your deceased father, the Gongshi, greatly assisted King Wen, he helped King Wen receive this great mandate. When King Wu had conquered the great city of Shang, he then went on to announce it to Heaven, saying, ‘I shall dwell in these central states and from there govern the people.’ Alas! You are but young sons without understanding. Look to the Gongshi, have a jue -cup [of liquor] for Heaven, and penetrate the mandate and revere the offerings!” The king’s (i.e., King Wu’s) reverent virtue filled 32 Heaven and instructed our lack of cleverness. 33 The king completed his address. He  was rewarded with thirty strings of cowries, which he used to make a precious, revered vessel for Xgong. It was the king’s fifth year (sacrificial cycle). 34

Again, this inscription contains some ambiguities and difficult points, but the overall situation is clear. During the process of establishing his residence at the newly built capital of Chengzhou,

30 Based on the inscription’s reference to the king’s change of residence to Chengzhou and to Kings Wen and Wu, there is little doubt that the He zun dates to the reign of King Cheng. See MWX 32, 20-2, esp. n. 1; Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” Wenwu 1976.1, 60; Sources , 110. 31 The reading of this first line of the inscription is problematic. For an in-depth discussion of the line, see chapter 3, note 6; Appendix 1. 32 Following MWX, 21 n. 13, in reading gu 谷 as yu 裕, glossed as yurong 裕容. 33 Following ibid. in reading  as wei 惟. 34 For an in-depth examination of this inscription, see the associated articles in Wenwu 1976.1, including Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” 60-3; Ma Chengyuan, “He zun mingwen chushi,” 64-5, 93; and Zhang Zhenglang, “He zun mingwen jieshi buyi,” 66. See also Li Xueqin, Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu , 38-45.

King Cheng, son of King Wu, performed rites dedicated to his father and to tian, “Heaven.” 35

On this occasion, he addressed a group called the zong xiaozi, “young sons of the ancestral

line/temple,” at a place called the “Capital Hall;” these were probably relatives of the Zhou royal

house. 36 There he entreated them to look back to and emulate the example of their ancestor, for

whom no name is given; he is known only by the generic honorific title gongshi 公氏. This

Gongshi participated in the establishment of the Zhou state with King Wen. He , a member of

Gongshi’s lineage, was afterward rewarded with the substantial sum of thirty strings of cowries, with which he commissioned a vessel dedicated to X (the character is damaged) Gong – possibly the Gongshi that the king mentioned, or perhaps one of his successors as head of the lineage.

The He zun inscription describes a visit paid by King Cheng to a group defined by their

common relations of patrilineal descent; it is likely that these “young sons” or “scions” were

related to the Zhou royal house.37 There the king recalled the identity of the lineage group’s

“nexus ancestor,” the individual responsible for the connection between the attendees and the

Zhou royal house; in this case, the nexus ancestor, called Gongshi in the inscription, was active

during the life of King Wen. After recalling that individual precedent that connected the lineage

with the royal house, the king then conferred a reward on one of its members. No justification

was given other than the aforementioned connection;38 this may reflect an understood connection of kinship between the royal house and the zong xiaozi among whom He numbered.

35 The term feng 豐/li 禮 may indicate a specific type of rite in the Western Zhou context; see the discussion in Chapter 3. 36 Tang Lan identifies the “Jing Hall” as an ancestral temple at Chengzhou see Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” 60-3. The phrase zong xiaozi appears in only one other place in the inscriptions, in the inscription of the Li juzun 駒尊 (6011), wherein it clearly refers to relatives of the king; see below. The phrase zongzi 宗子 appears in the inscription of the Shan ding 善鼎 (2820), in contrast to a group called baisheng 百生 or baixing 百姓; see the section on xing 姓 below (1.2.3). 37 For the view that He and his fellow zongzi were related to the Zhou royal house, see Tang Lan, “He zun,” 60; Ma Chengyuan, “He zun,” 65, 93. 38 Unlike in many Western Zhou inscriptions that record rewards for services rendered well.

In the He zun inscription, the king re-instantiates the lineage as a meaningful unit within

the Zhou system of ritual prestige by 1) recalling its nexus ancestor in an ancestral-ritual context

(i.e., the ancestral hall) and 2) reiterating the relationship of patronage begun by that ancestor by

conferring a gift on one of his descendants. The language of reiteration is prominent; the king

describes the participants as youths in need of molding and urges them to base their education on

the model of their nexus ancestor. There is no explicit expression of a sense of reciprocal

obligation of the royal house, as in the Yin Ji li inscription. This may be a factor of the difference in age or prestige of the parties involved; in the He zun inscription, the king is supposedly addressing a group of young people. Alternatively, it might reflect the different relationships between the royal house and the two kin groups; the He zun kin group may have

found themselves in a more subordinate position with respect to the Zhou royal house. 39 I

suspect, however, that it is merely due to the fact that the He zun directly records a royal address, while the Yin Ji li offers what may be a personal understanding of the reward received from the queen.

The response portion of the inscription of the Li juzun 駒尊 (6011), a middle Western

Zhou vessel recording a rite involving the capture of foals, offers a further example of the likely

use of zong to describe a group of people. 40 It again situates the king in a position of precedence and authority with respect to the zong and, in particular, the zongzi , or “scions of the ancestral temple/line”:

39 As a King Cheng-era vessel, the He zun records events that date to the heyday of Zhou royal power; the relative power differential between the king and the groups receiving patronage may thus have differed between the He zun and the Yin Ji li . 40 The unusual shape of the Li juzun complicates its dating, but it can probably be assigned to the period of Kings Mu-Gong; for a more detailed consideration, see the discussion of the foal-catching rite in chapter 3, section 4.2.3.

…王親旨（詣），駒易（賜）兩，拜首曰：王弗望（忘）氒（厥）舊宗小子， 皇 身。曰：王倗下，不（丕）其則，邁（萬）年保我邁（萬）宗。… …The king personally acknowledged Li and awarded him two foals. Li bowed and struck his head, saying, “The king does not forget the young scion of his old ancestral line ( jue jiu zong xiaozi ), but honors Li himself.” 41 Li said, “The king is friendly to his subordinates. May he then for ten thousand years greatly protect our ten thousand zong !”

The phrase jue jiu zong xiao zi 厥舊宗小子, “the scions of his old lineage,” with its explicit

possessive pronoun jue referring to the king, indicates clearly that Li considered his lineage to

have not just a connection of patronage with the royal house, as did the kinship groups of Yin Ji

and He, but a direct kinship with the king himself. Recent analysis of the Meixian vessels and

their connection with the Shan 單 lineage has confirmed this. 42 This is likely why Li does not

refer to a “nexus ancestor” in order to establish a precedent of connection with the royal house,

as in the case of the He zun . If he did enjoy a patrilineal kinship relation with – i.e., belong to the same zong as – the Zhou king, then as a co-descendant of the early Zhou kings, his right to receive prestige and wealth was implicit in his kinship status.

The last phrase of the above excerpt is less personally motivated. In his extolling of the king’s virtues, Li situates the king at the top of the network of “ten thousand ancestral lines”

(wan zong 萬宗) making up the understood fabric of Zhou elite political society. By calling on the king to protect the myriad zong , Li expresses his conception of the Zhou state as a

conglomerate whole with ancestral temple-lines as its individual components. It must indeed

have been in the king’s interest to protect the zong , as the ancestral-ritual model gave him a

41 The character  is problematic. Ma Chengyuan suggests a phonetic connection with hui 輝; see MWX , 190, n. 5. The meaning of huang 皇, however, is clear; in the translation, I have treated the two as a compound phrase. 42 Sena, 98-104, traces the connection between the Shan lineage and the figure known as Hui Zhong Lifu 惠仲父, to be identified with the Li from the Li juzun . Through his investigation of female names in the inscriptions relating to the Shan lineage, Sena demonstrates the possibility that later historical traditions connecting the linage to the Zhou royal house are correct; see ibid., 112-7. Li’s assertion of kinship with the Zhou king is therefore at least possible, although Sena, 112, points out that the received sources substantiating that relationship are quite late.

47 venue through which to exercise non-military coercion and maintain his status as the current instantiation of the royal line, the font of ritual and political prestige within Zhou elite society.

Likewise, it would have been in Li’s interest to see the zong protected; as a (at least imagined) relative of the Zhou kings, he had the right to expect that the king “had not forgotten” their common interest in maintaining both the ritual prestige and the temporal power of the Zhou royal house. 43

1.2.1.3: Summary

In the above examples, we have seen that the concept of zong played a vital role in the patronage relations that held the Western Zhou state coalition together. The Zhou royal family did not stand outside this system, but operated within it and arbitrated it by example. The location known as Zongzhou, “Ancestral Zhou,” was the headquarters of the ancestral ritual of the Zhou royal house, as well as a frequent point of contact between the Zhou kings and subordinate elites; it was in a sense the prototypical zong . Non-royal elite groups with different cultural backgrounds and different connections to the Zhou kings maintained zong locally; Yin Ji was the bride of the patriarch of the powerful Jing 井 lineage group, while He and his fellow

scions may have been closely related to the royal house.

The existence of these zong at the local level provided a ritually sanctioned venue for the

king to negotiate relationships with the other participating power-holders. The force of their

legitimizing power came from their association with specific “nexus ancestors” whose lifetimes

43 It is of course possible to read the occurrences of the term zong in this inscription as referring to the “scions of his old ancestral temple” and the “many ancestral temples.” I read the term here as referring directly to the lineages associated with the zong model of temple worship, but the distinction between the two readings is merely one of direct vs. metonymic reference.

48 encompassed the moments of initial alliance between the Zhou royal house and its clients. 44 To

ensure the perpetuation of the Zhou state’s network of sociopolitical relations, these moments of

connection of the zong with the king and his line had to be re-instantiated with ceremonies that

recreated those moments of contact, encouraging the current generations on both sides to

participate personally in the construction of those relations. 45 The result was a process of

participatory enculturation that motivated subordinate Zhou elites to conceive of their personal

identities and degrees of status, prestige, and wealth in terms of the zong kinship model. It is perhaps for this reason that the term zong came to refer to the kinship model that supported the

temple system as well as the associated locations.

1.2.2: Kinship-based military units (Zu 族)

The term zu 族 is paired with zong in Eastern Zhou texts as the overall name for the

system of regulated kinship adhered to by the members of the Zhou cultural sphere. 46 In the pre-

Spring and Autumn context, it is often associated with the “clan marks” found on Shang bronzes,

identifiers that were apparently associated with internal divisions within Shang society. 47 Early

Western Zhou bronzes occasionally bear these clan marks as well; they are probably associated

with bronzes produced by elite groups of former Shang extraction. The term zu itself does

appear in the Western Zhou inscriptions, however, wherein it designates a social unit of military

significance:

44 Falkenhausen uses the term “focal ancestor” to refer to these individuals in their roles as lineage founders, as well as to those later ancestors who establish branch lineages; see Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 64-6. I prefer to use the phrase “nexus ancestor” to highlight the fact that their status as lineage founders derived from their connections with the Zhou royal house. 45 Later discussion of royal ritual will note specific examples of the opportunities created by the royal house for this contact and the ritual activities that gave the zong this atmosphere of sacred sanction. 46 See note 2. See also Liji , “Qu li xia,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1257; Lunyu, “Zi Lu,” Shisanjing zhushu , 2508; Xu Chaohua, Erya jinzhu , Nankai daxue, 1987, “Shi qin,” 155-8. 47 On which see William G. Boltz, “Language and Writing,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 113-4.

唯王令明公遣三族伐東或（國）… The king commanded Minggong to take three zu and attack the eastern states. (Minggong gui 明公簋[4029]) 48

49 …命女（汝） （司）公族，（與）參有 （司）、小子、師氏、虎臣，（與）朕褻事，（以）乃族干（扞）吾（敔）王身… …[The king] commands you to take charge of the gongzu , as well as the Three Supervisors, the Scions, the Marshals, and the Tiger Servants. Use your zu to shield my royal person… (Maogong ding 毛公鼎 [2841]) 50

The term zu is strongly associated with individuals bearing the title of gong , often translated as

“Duke,” but more widely applicable than that title.51 Besides the above example of the Maogong ding , the compound term gongzu 公族 appears in the inscriptions of the Zhong zhi 中觶 (6514), an early Western Zhou vessel, and the Fansheng guigai 番生簋蓋 (4326), a middle Western

Zhou vessel, designating a military unit. It appears occasionally as a component of terms of address as well; the middle Western Zhou inscriptions of the Shi You gui 師酉簋 (4288-91) and

the Mu gui 牧簋 (4343) mention individuals with the title “Gongzu” serving as youzhe in the ceremony of royal appointment. 52

48 The Minggong gui was probably commissioned by Ming Bao, scion of the Duke of Zhou, mentioned also in the Ling fangyi 令方彝 (9901). The vessel would thus fall firmly within the early Western Zhou. See MWX 58, 35-6 (King Kang); Daxi , 10-1(King Cheng), Duandai 11, 24 (King Cheng); Shirakawa 1.13, 132-40; Landscape and Power , 313, 313 n. 43. 49 The transcription of this character follows that given in MWX , 317. That transcription is followed throughout this work. 50 The Maogong ding is probably a King Xuan bronze; see Daxi , 136; MWX , 447; Bureaucracy , 85. 51 The term gong was applied to a number of Zhou elites of privilege second only to that of the Zhou king, and so was frequently translated as “Duke” in early English-language scholarship on early China, by analogy with the ranks of the European monarchy. In the Zhou context, however, it was also applied to other individuals as a general honorific. See Yoshimoto Michimasa, “Seishuu sakumei kinbunkou,” Shirin 74, no. 1991.5, 60; cited in Constance Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” BSOAS 60.2 (1997), 263. 52 The details of the appointment ceremony, and its role in the overall trope of Zhou elite ritual, will be discussed in Chapter 4. The Zhong zhi is an early Western Zhou bronze; see MWX 109, 77, which dates it to King Zhao, and Daxi , 18-9, which assigns it to King Cheng. The Fansheng guigai is probably to be dated to the middle Western Zhou; see MWX , 224-6, as well as the extensive discussion and translation of the inscription in Bureaucracy , 63-7. The Shi You gui has been variously dated to the middle and late Western Zhou; see MWX 192, 125-7 (King Gong), Daxi , 88-9 (King Yih), Duandai , 244-5 (King Xiao); Shirakawa 29.173, 553-61 (early King Li); Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu , 96 (late Western Zhou). The discovery of the Shi You ding has provided new evidence for a dating toward the early end of that spectrum, probably to the reign of King Gong. See Zhu

The connection of the zu with the title of gong may indicate that the zu social/military unit had a more or less hereditary character, inasmuch as the title gong tended to be hereditary. 53

It is of note, however, that the inscriptions containing the term zu do not contain substantial

narratives of ancestral-ritual practices, as is the case with many of the inscriptions containing the

term zong . It would seem that the institution of the zu was associated with individual, non-royal

power holders and may have existed outside and parallel to the interaction network supported by

ancestral-temple ritual and mediated by the Zhou royal house. By the middle Western Zhou

period, however, the royal house was at least in contact with members of the zu structure via the

ritualized process of royal appointment to office. This fits with the overall findings of this work,

which suggest that the middle Western Zhou saw a program of modification of royally sponsored

ritual to intensify royal control over many aspects of state operation, including a decreased

emphasis on the public performance of royal ancestral ritual.54

1.2.3: Clans/surnames ( xing 姓)

David Sena has pointed out that the term xing , usually translated as “surname” or “clan,”

did not enter common use until after the Western Zhou period, but that the exogamic groups with

which it would eventually become associated (the Ji 姬 xing to which the Zhou royal house is

Fenghan and Yao Qingfang, “Shi You ding yu Shi You gui,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2004.1, 4-10, 35; Bureaucracy , 198, 198 n. 15. The Mu gui is a middle Western Zhou vessel; see MWX 260, 187-8 (King Yih); Daxi , 75-6 (King Gong); Landscape and Power , 100-2 (includes translation); and in particular Sources , 259-61, which proposes the likely possibility of a King Xiao dating. For a more detailed discussion of the Mu gui , see Li Feng, “Textual Criticism and Western Zhou Bronze Inscriptions: The Example of the Mu Gui,” in Tang Chung and Chen Xingcan, eds., Essays in Honor of An Zhimin , Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004, 280-97. See also Shirakawa 19.104, 361-9. 53 The descendants of Zhougong Dan (the Duke of Zhou), for example, were occasionally termed gong ; see the inscription of the Ze Ling fangzun 夨令方尊 (JC 6016). 54 This program was connected with widespread changes in the character and operation of the Zhou state that took place over the course of the Western Zhou period; for two different models of those changes, see the discussion of the unsuccessful military endeavors of King Zhao in Landscape and Power , 93-102, and Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 29-73.

51 said to have belonged and the Jiang 姜 xing with which they traditionally intermarried being

probably the best known of these) already played an important role in elite interaction during the

Western Zhou. 55 Whether the groupings to which the term refers were remnants of earlier kinship divisions or new internal categories created by the Zhou to help organize marriage relations remains a subject of debate. 56

Table 1.1 lists the frequency of occurrence of some of the best-known xing in bronze inscriptions dateable to specific periods. As might be expected, Ji 姬 and Jiang 姜, the two xing associated respectively with the Zhou royal house and the lineage with which it traditionally intermarried, are the most common, appearing frequently in early inscriptions and growing in frequency throughout the period. Only one of the terms, Ren 妊, appears in Shang-era bronze

inscriptions; this is consistent with the historical tradition that King Wen’s mother came from the

Ren marriage group. 57 All terms studied except Ying 贏 and Huai 媿 increase in frequency over

the course of the period; Ying in particular is the least common of the terms and may not

comprise enough occurrences to be statistically significant. Overall, it seems that the use of

marriage-group identity within the confines of the ancestral-ritual institution grew significantly

in frequency over the course of the Western Zhou period. This may reflect an overall increase in

the use of marriage group as a marker of identity, which would tend to confirm the opinion of

Pulleyblank and Sena that xing marriage groups were popularized during the Western Zhou

55 Sena, “Reproducing Society: Lineage and Kinship in Western Zhou China,” 7; see also Edwin G. Pulleyblank, “Ji 姬 and Jiang 姜: The Role of Exogamic Clans in the Organization of the Zhou Polity,” EC 25 (2000), 1-27, cited therein. 56 For a list of scholars who have weighed in on the viewpoint, see ibid., 8-9, notes 6 and 7. 57 See Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 115. Pulleyblank notes the difficulty of reconciling the pattern of use of the Ren 任 surname, and its traditional association with Tai Ren, with the fact that the royal line of Song, said to be descended from the Shang kings, was named Zi 子; see Pulleyblank, 9. I would suggest that the group identified as Ren was of non-royal Shang origin; that is, that its affiliation with Shang was political and cultural rather than kinship-based. The inclusion of the identifier Ren here is not to be taken as evidence that the xing kinship model existed prior to the Western Zhou period; it is entirely possible that a pre-existing group defined along different criteria was incorporated into the Western Zhou interaction sphere as a xing .

52 period as an organizational model. 58 However, given that specific xing appear most often in the

Western Zhou inscriptions as identifiers for female elites, expansion of the participation of women in the patrilineal ancestral cult, or a mixture of the two causes, may also account for the increase in frequency of specific xing names in the inscriptions.

In a sense, the term xing 姓 itself does appear in the Western Zhou inscriptions, in that the character sheng 生, the graphic basis for the later character xing , is quite common. 59 In particular, sheng often appears as a component of male personal names, especially in inscriptions

from the second half of the Western Zhou. 60 There are a few special occurrences of the term xing , however, in which it acts as a measure word for groups of people. The majority of these occur in conjunction with the word bai 百, “one hundred,” as in the common term baixing that is

in continued use even today:

…其隹（唯）我者（諸）侯、百生（姓），氒（厥）貯（賈），母（毋）不即市，母（毋）敢或入 （蠻）宄貯（賈），則亦井（刑）。… ...Let not the merchants of our various lords or of our baisheng/xing not to go to market, nor let them dare to bring in traitorous merchants of the Man-peoples, lest they indeed be punished... (Xi Jia pan [10174]) 61

58 See note 55. 59 Pulleyblank is rightly skeptical of the possibility of identifying the words sheng 生 and xing 姓 based on their potential use of the same character in early inscriptional sources; see “Ji and Jiang,” p. 12. His criticisms, however, are based on a connection drawn by Keightley between the phrase duo sheng 多生, appearing in the oracle bones, and bai xing 百姓, common in later materials. Pulleyblank does not refer directly to the use of the phrase baisheng 百生 in the bronze inscriptions. 60 For example, those of the Shanbo Taisheng zhong 單伯旲生鐘 (82), dating probably to the middle Western Zhou (see MWX 235, 164-5 [Kings Gong-Yih]; Duandai 141, 194-5 [King Yih]; for an alternate dating, see Daxi , 118- 9, which assigns the zhong to King Li); the Zhong Shengfu li 仲生父鬲 (729) (dated by the AS database to the late Western Zhou; see also Qingyang diqu bowuguan and Xu Junchen, “Gansu Qingyang diqu chutu de Shang Zhou qingtongqi,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1983.3, 8-11, pl. 1, esp. 10, which dates the vessel to the second half of the Western Zhou), and the Zhousheng li 琱生鬲 (744) (which MWX 291, 210-1, and Duandai 167, 235-6, agree in assigning to King Xiao, but probably dating instead to the late Western Zhou based on connection with the Fifth- year and Sixth-year Zhousheng gui [4292 and 4293, respectively], on the dating of which see Bureaucracy , 321, 339; see also Sackler , 329-30). It is of note that, to my knowledge, none of these male personal names contain both the character sheng and one of the group-referents that would later come to be referred to as xing; as is noted below, those group-referents seem to appear only in terms of address for women. 61 The Xi Jia pan is generally recognized as a King Xuan bronze; see MWX 437, 305-6; Daxi 134, 143-4; Duandai , 323-7; Shirakawa 32.191, 785-99; Sources , 141-2, 205; Landscape and Power , 151.

In the early-Western-Zhou inscription of the Yihou Ze gui 宜侯夨簋 (4320), however, the number is different: 62

易（賜）才（在）宜王人 □ 又七生（姓）… [I] award [you] seven(teen?) sheng/xing of king’s men who are at Yi…

It is difficult to say based on the small number of examples available just what sort of people the sheng/xing category indicated. One middle Western Zhou inscription, the Shan ding 善鼎

(2820), gives us some clue as to who the baixing were not: 63

余其用各我宗子（與）百生（姓）… I shall use [this vessel] to prime the sons of the temple-line and [to prime] the baisheng/xing ...

In each of the above inscriptions, the units designated by the term sheng/xing are linked to a

group that enjoys a certain degree of prestige but is also subordinate in some respect to the

power-holders whose activities are commemorated. The sheng/xing are “king’s men” granted to

the new lord of the Yi state; they are comparable to the “various lords” (over whose affairs Xi Jia

is granted some authority) or to the “sons of the temple-line” (whom Shan intends to educate

using a ritual vessel). It would seem, then, that the term sheng/xing designated groups of people

of elite but not paramount status from the early Western Zhou onward. The etymology of the

word sheng makes it likely that these groups were conceived of in terms of some form of

62 The Yihou Ze gui is a product of the early stages of the formation of the Western Zhou state, recording the investment of a ranking Zhou elite with authority over a regional state; see MWX 57, 34-5 (dating the bronze to King Kang); Duandai , 14-7 (dating it to King Cheng); Tang Lan, “Yihou Ze gui kaoshi,” in Tang Lan xiansheng jinwen lunji , 66-71. For an English translation and discussion of the Yihou Ze gui inscription, see Bureaucracy , 238-41. 63 On the date of the Shan ding , see MWX 321, 233-4; Daxi , 65; Shirakawa 23.133, 95-100.

54 common descent; the exact criteria of that descent remain unclear. However, they appear specifically to have been perceived as distinct from the “sons of the [core] temple-line,” which is to say from the patriline of the power-holder in any particular area. It is possible that they referred to the group-referents that were frequently used to identify the birth kinship-units of married women, which would later become known as xing ; however, there is no direct evidence in the Western Zhou inscriptions to corroborate this.

1.2.4: Shi 氏

The term shi appears with great frequency in the bronze inscriptions. It is much rarer in early Western Zhou inscriptions, however; of 150 Western Zhou vessels listed in the AS database with inscriptions containing the character shi 氏, the editors definitively date only 9 to

the early Western Zhou, for a proportion of about 0.06%. 64 Four of these vessels comprise two sets of two vessels with identical inscriptions, leaving only 7 discrete inscriptions containing the term.

1.2.4.1: Early Western Zhou cases of shi 氏

These are of two main types. The inscriptions of two of the vessels, the Xiaochen Shi Mao Yin ding 小臣氏樊尹鼎 (2351) and the He zun 尊 (6014), seem definitively to employ the term as

65 an honorific referring to a specific individual:

小臣氏樊尹乍（作）寶用。

64 By comparison, nearly half of the Western Zhou vessels in the collection (2933 of 6076) are assigned to the early Western Zhou. These figures were retrieved from the AS database in April 2012. 65 The AS database dates the Xiaochen Shi Mao Yin ding to the early Western Zhou; for this inscription see also Sandai 3.16.6. On the dating of the He zun , see note 30.

Petty Servant Shi Maoyin makes [this vessel to] treasure and use. (Xiaochen Shi Mao Yin ding )

…王（誥）宗小子于京室，曰：昔才（在）爾考公氏，克（弼）玟（文）王， （肆）玟王受茲□□ （大命），… The king addressed the young sons of the line at the Capital Chamber, saying, “Of old, your deceased father Gong Shi was able to assist King Wen, and then King Wen received this [great mandate]…” (He zun )

The inclusion of the title “Petty Servant” ( xiaochen 小臣) before the first occurrence of the term shi , and that of the term “deceased father” ( kao 考) and the honorific gong 公 (sometimes

translated as “Duke,” as in “the Duke of Zhou,” but more widely applicable than that title) before

the term shi , suggest strongly that its referents are specific individuals; I do not know of a case in the inscriptions in which kao , in particular, can be interpreted as applying to a group of people.

The inscriptions of the pair of X ding 鼎 (2740-1) and the Ling ding 令鼎 (2803) 66 contain the character as the second half of the compound shishi 師氏:

隹（唯）王伐東尸（夷），溓公令  67 眔史  （旅）曰：（以）師氏眔有 （司）後或（國） 伐貊。 孚（俘）貝， 用乍（作） 公寶鼎。 It was when the king attacked the eastern Yi peoples. Duke Qian commanded X and Scribe Lv, saying, “Take the Marshals ( shishi ), the Supervisors ( yousi 有司), and the rear states and ? 68 and attack the Mo people. X captured cowries. X thereby makes a precious and revered ding -cauldron for Duke Wan (for feasting the Duke?). (X ding )

王大耤（藉）農于諆田，餳（觴）。王射，有（司）眔師氏、小子（會）射… The king greatly plowed and farmed at the fields of Qi; [there was a] feast. The king performed archery, and the Supervisors, the Marshals ( shishi ), and the young sons performed archery together… (Ling ding )

This compound is well attested in Western Zhou bronzes of various dates as a military designation that was not awarded through the royal appointment process that developed in the

66 The X ding are associated with the royal campaigns in the east conducted during the early Western Zhou and are generally dated to King Cheng or King Kang; see Daxi , 28; Duandai , 23; MWX , 51 (for the King Kang dating). On the Ling ding , see the discussion of the royal ploughing rite in chapter 3 of this work. 67 The rendering of this character is based on that given in MWX , 51. 68 My interpretation of this line follows that given in MWX , 51.

56 mid-Western Zhou. 69 Based on the above examples, we may speculate that during the early

Western Zhou, it combined a designation of military experience ( shi 師) with a more general

individual honorific ( shi 氏). By comparison with the Supervisors ( yousi 有司) with which it is in both cases listed, the term would seem to refer to a category of persons by virtue of their level of skill or type of responsibilities, rather than as instances of patrilines.

The remaining early Western Zhou inscription in JC containing the character, that of the

Zuo Ren Shi gui 作任氏簋 (3455-6), is more ambiguous: 70

乍（作）任氏从（從）簋。 [?] makes a following (portable?) gui -tureen for Ren Shi.

In light of the above examples, I suspect that shi is here too intended as an honorific for an individual, in this case with the name Ren (on which see the discussion of xing above). Overall, there appear to be no cases from the early Western Zhou in which the term shi 氏 refers to a

corporate patrilineal descent group, or, for that matter, a descent group of any sort.

1.2.4.2: Middle Western Zhou cases of shi 氏

The semantic range of the term shi seems to have broadened during the mid-Western

Zhou. The term shishi 師氏 still appears in inscriptions dated by the AS database to that period as a designation of individuals responsible for military affairs. 71 It is joined by the new term

69 See Bureaucracy , 312-3. 70 The first of these bronzes was recovered at Luoyang, according to the AS database; see also Zhensong 4.39. 71 See the Shi Ju guigai 師遽簋蓋 (4214); the Shi Yun guigai 師簋蓋 (4283-4); the Dong gui 簋 (4322); the Lu Dong you 彔卣 (5419-20); and the Yong yu 永盂 (10322). On the dating of the Shi Ju guigai , see MWX , 129-30 (King Gong), Daxi , 83-4 (King Yih), Duandai , 160-1(King Gong, but admits the possibility of King Yih). The Shi Yun guigai can probably be assigned to the reigns of Kings Mu-Gong based on the appearance of Jingbo in its inscription. See Sources , 118-20; Bureaucracy , 121; on the dating of this bronze see also Duandai 119, 163- 7 (King Gong); MWX, 166-7 (Kings Gong-Yih). The Dong gui and Lu Dong you are part of a complex of bronzes produced by the same figure, discussed at length in Shirakawa 17.91-2, 198-232. These are associated

57 yinshi 尹氏, which Li Feng identifies as a high-ranking office in the service of the royal

household combining various administrative duties. 72 The term baoshi 保氏 appears once as well, in the inscription of the Shi Yu guigai 師俞簋蓋 (4277), wherein I take it to refer to a

group of people assigned to a particular duty in a manner similar to its use in the term shishi: 73

王乎（呼）乍（作）冊內史冊令師俞，（司）保氏… The king called upon the Document Maker and Interior Scribe to order Shi Yu to take charge of the Guards (baoshi )...

The term shi also begins to appear in conjunction with specialized terms designating an

individual’s degree of seniority within a patriline: 74

…白（伯）氏  貝，易（賜） 弓、矢束、馬匹、貝五朋… …The Elder rewarded 75 Huang, awarding him a bow and arrows, a horse, and five strings 76 of cowries… (Huang gui  簋 [4099])

…弔（叔）氏事（使） 安白（伯），賓 馬 （轡）乘… The Second ( shushi 叔氏) sent Fu to pacify the Elder of Ji; Fu was granted a horse, bridle with reins, and carriage…(Gong Mao ding 公貿鼎 [2719]) 77

Perhaps most notably, in the middle Western Zhou inscriptions, the term shi becomes a common way to refer to elite women, a function that it would continue to hold up through at

with the activity period of Elder Father/Marshal Yong ( Bo/Shi Yongfu 伯/師雍父), on which see in particular Shirakawa 17, 222-32; on the dating of these bronzes to King Mu, see chapter 4, note 18. The Yong yu is almost certainly a King Gong bronze; see MWX , 141-2, Sources , 109, 258; Bureaucracy , 136-9, esp. 137, n. 77 (this source includes a full translation of the inscription). 72 Bureaucracy , 76-7, 311. 73 The Shi Yu guigai probably dates to the King Yih-King Xiao era. See Bureaucracy , 119, n. 56; MWX , 203-4. 74 That is, bo and shu , members of the set bo 伯, zhong 仲, shu 叔, and ji 季, referring either to the seniority of a member within a lineage or to the relation of that lineage to the trunk lineage from which it sprang. See Sena, 123-4. In the above examples, the seniority terms almost certainly refer to the positions of the individuals in the lineages, as no names appear to identify the lineages in question. 75 Following Duandai , 138, in reading  as “to reward” in this inscription. 76 Duandai , 137-8, dates this bronze to the reign of King Zhao, based on calligraphy, the simple quality of its surface pattern, and the gifts conferred in the event it commemorates. 77 Duandai , 131-2, dates this bronze to the reign of King Kang based on its calligraphy; the vessel was lost by the time of Chen’s writing . See also Zhensong 3.23.

58 least the Song.78 In this regard, it normally appears as a suffix to various group referents that

would later become known as xing 姓, “surnames,” such as Huai 媿, Jiang 姜, Ying 贏, etc.

These women are usually, though not always, named in association with the males through whom they were connected to the patrilines of the commissioners of the bronzes. 79 Often these are their husbands, as in the Wei ding 衛鼎 (2616): 80

衛乍（作）文考小中（仲）、姜氏盂鼎… Wei makes a vessel for his cultured deceased father Xiao Zhong and for Jiang Shi…

The Qiao pan 毳盤 (10119) and Qiao yi 毳匜 (10247), however, describe a different situation: 81

毳乍（作）王母媿氏（沬）般（盤），媿氏其（眉）壽邁（萬）年用。 Qiao makes a washing-basin for the king’s mother Huaishi; may Huaishi use it throughout ten thousand years of long life.

It is important to note that all of the examples of shi in the two new usages above refer to

individuals with respect to their membership in kinship groups rather than to the groups

themselves. The new usages of the term reflect an expansion in the role of various kinship

descriptors in the expression of elite individual identity.

1.2.4.3: Late Western Zhou cases of shi 氏

Late Western Zhou inscriptions containing the term (of which the AS database identifies

102) use it in essentially the same way as the middle Western Zhou inscriptions, to indicate

78 I am indebted to Professor Robert Hymes for his observation of the longevity of this usage. 79 I know of one probable mid-Western Zhou exception, the Yingshi ding 贏氏鼎 (2027), so dated by the AS database. 80 On this bronze see Xi’an shi wenwu guanlichu, “Shaanxi Chang’an Xinwangcun, Mawangcun chutu de Xi Zhou tongqi,” Kaogu 1974.1, 1-5, 69-72, esp. 2. The report suggests a middle Western Zhou dating (see p. 4). 81 The AS database dates both of the Qiao bronzes to the middle Western Zhou. On the Qiao pan , see also Zhensong 10.26.3, Xia Shang Zhou 419; on the Qiao yi , see Sandai 17.33.3, Tongkao 854.

59 functionally defined positions such as the yinshi and the shishi ; as a suffix identifying male individuals, accompanied by a sibling-seniority term; and as a suffix identifying female individuals, accompanied by a “surname” group-referent. 82 It also appears appended to a range of titles of personal prestige and authority, as in the inscription of the Houshi gui 侯氏簋

(3781): 83

侯氏乍（作）孟姬，其邁（萬）年永寶。 The Marquis ( hou + shi ) makes a revered gui -tureen for Meng (“Elder Daughter”) Ji; may [she] eternally treasure it for ten thousand years.

In this inscription, the term shi is appended to hou 侯, typically understood as a title for a

regional ruler. The Fifth-year Shaobo Hu gui (Zhousheng gui ) 五年召伯虎簋/琱生簋 (4292),

dating to the reign of King Xuan, 84 contains a pair of similarly generic phrases, fushi 婦氏, or

“Lady,” and junshi 君氏, or “Lord,” along with the phrase of address Gebo Shi 戈伯氏, which combines a lineage identifier (Ge) and a seniority term ( bo , “Elder”). These uses recall the appearance of shi as an individual honorific in the early Western Zhou inscriptions discussed above.

Finally, late Western Zhou inscriptions begin to employ the term in its later sense of

“lineage.” Two of these are associated with the San 散 polity. One is the famous Sanshi pan 散

氏盤 (10176), well known as an example of a documented land transaction between two corporate entities, in which the term refers to the San lineage: 85

82 Retrieved from the AS database, April 2012. 83 On this bronze see Xiangfan shi wenwu guanli chu, “Hubei Xiangfan jianxuan de Shang Zhou qingtongqi,”, Wenwu 1982.9, 84-6. Its hanging, animal-faced ears, band of curved decoration, ridged surface, and overall shape resemble those of the Liang Qi gui 梁其簋 (4150), which Wang Shimin, Chen Gongrou, and Zhang Changshou assign to the early phase of the late Western Zhou and cite as part of their gui system II (see 92, 95). 84 Along with the Sixth-year Shaobo Hu gui , this bronze can be dated to King Xuan; see note 60. 85 The Sanshi pan is dated to the late Western Zhou through its connection with the Guo Cong bronzes; see MWX ,

86 …唯王九月，辰才（在）乙卯，夨卑、鮮、且、 、旅誓，曰：我既付散氏田器，有爽，實余有散氏心賊，則爰千罰千… …It was the king’s ninth month, on the morning of the yimao day. The representatives of Ze, Bei, Xian, Qie, X, and Lü swore an oath, saying, “We have already rendered land and vessels unto the San lineage, and there was some deviation. If I truly bear some ill-will toward the San lineage, then let (me) be penalized a full thousand….”

The term Sanshi might still be interpreted here as meaning “the gentlemen of San,” referring to

the group of San partisans mentioned earlier in the inscription. However, in light of the

87 inscription of the Sanshi Chefu hu  氏車父壺 (9669), I read it as referring to the San lineage:

 氏車父乍（作）姜壺… Sanshi Chefu makes Shi(?) Jiang a sacrificial hu -pot…

The associated inscription of the San Chefu hu (9697) omits the shi in the name. Given our

understanding of San as a late Western Zhou lineage with a geographically fixed territory, we

can be fairly sure that the shi here was associated with the preceding “San,” as in the Sanshi pan

inscription, rather than with the following personal name “Chefu.”

The inscriptions of several bronzes containing the term Guoji 虢季 corroborate the use of

shi 氏 to refer to lineages by the late Western Zhou. As mentioned above, Sena has convincingly

shown that Guoji 虢季 referred to a specific lineage. 88 In fact, Sena observes the existence of

multiple groups of Guo bronzes with the same commissioners that alternate between terms of

address combining the lineage term Guoji and a personal name (e.g., the Guoji Zibai pan 虢季子

297-9, esp. n. 16; Shirakawa 24.139, 191-227; Bureaucracy , 183-8, esp. n. 69. 86 The transcription of this character follows MWX , 298. 87 The AS database dates this vessel to the mid-Western Zhou, but assigns all of the other vessels from the Shaochencun, Zhuangbai Dadui hoard, including the physically identical San Chefu hu (9697),to the late Western Zhou. I am indebted to Li Feng for this observation. (On these vessels, see MWX , 358-9; Shi Yan, “Fufeng Zhuangbai Dadui chutu de yi pi Xi Zhou tongqi,” Wenwu 1972.6, 30-5.) 88 Sena, 169-74.

白盤 [10173]) and terms of address combining the same personal name with a state name, reign name, and rank (e.g., the Guo Xuangong Zibai ding 虢宣公子白鼎 [2637]), at once showing the

distinction and relationship between Guo the polity and Guoji the lineage.89 The existence of the

Guoji Shi Zizha li 虢季氏子鬲 (683) and the group of vessels commissioned by Guoji Shi Zizu

虢季氏子組90 shows conclusively that the term shi 氏 could refer to lineages by the late Western

Zhou.

1.2.4.4: Summary

The term shi appears only rarely in early Western Zhou inscriptions, as an individual honorific and in the context of the term shishi , “Marshals.” By the middle Western Zhou, it had become more common and its use had expanded to include functional titles (such as yinshi ,

“Chief,” and baoshi , “Guards”) as well as phrases of address for males based on patrilineal seniority terms and for females based on origin-group referents (or “clans,” or “surnames”). It retained all the above uses in the late Western Zhou and was also used with more generic titles of respect ( fushi 婦氏, or “Lady,” and junshi 君氏, or “Lord”); in addition, it finally appears in the late Western Zhou with its later accepted meaning of “lineage,” referring to the elite heads of the polities of San and Guo. Overall, its use throughout most of the Western Zhou was less as a kin- group referent and more as a respectful title allowing the speaker to highlight those aspects of an individual’s identity that were important in the context under consideration. In this regard, its

89 Sena, 169-74. As Sena (p. 170) notes, the Guoji Zibai pan is probably a King Xuan bronze, since it deals with affairs involving the Xianyun. A further example, also cited by Sena, is the group of the Guoji Shi Zizha li 虢季氏子鬲 (683), the Guo Wengong Zizha ding 虢文公子鼎 (2634-6), and the Guo Wengong Zizha li 虢文公子鬲 (736); see ibid., 172-3. 90 These include the Guoji Shi Zizu gui 虢季氏子組簋 (3971-3), the Guoji Shi Zizu hu 虢季氏子組壺 (9655), and the Guoji Shi Zizu li 虢季氏子組鬲 (662), all dated by the AS database to the late Western Zhou, as is the case with the Guoji Shi Zizha li .

62 evolution is useful as an index of the range of affiliations considered to form important aspects of personal identity among Western Zhou elites.

1.2.5: The terminology of Western Zhou group identity

The concept of the zong , or ancestral temple, was used by the Zhou royal house as a medium of arbitration of relationships with allied elite groups. Within the context of the zong , the royal house and their dependents could engage in mutual negotiation and ritual instantiation of relationships through the sacralizing medium of the ancestral cult, based around the precedents set by specific “nexus ancestors” with whom the relationships between the Zhou kings and particular client elites were initially established.

Over the course of the Western Zhou, perhaps due to the accelerated demographic growth of groups that adhered to it, the patrilineal model of descent associated with the ancestral ritual of the zong disseminated itself throughout the sphere of Zhou influence. By the middle Western

Zhou period, the role of kinship in the definition of elite identity had expanded considerably.

The use of lineage-seniority terms as exclusive identity markers, in conjunction with the general honorific shi 氏, had become more common – so much so that by the late Western Zhou, the

term shi began to refer directly to patrilines. At the same time, the use of xing 姓-type terms for marriage groups in the inscriptions intensified over the course of the Western Zhou as well, providing an alternate, farther-reaching model of descent that allowed more substantial incorporation of women into the social rubric of the patrilineal-ancestral cult. Finally, the zu 族,

a social unit of military significance, maintained a close association with figures bearing the

honorific/rank term gong 公 througout the Western Zhou period; it seems to have constituted a

separate forum of interaction between high-ranking, non-royal elites and their subordinates.

The subsequent section will explore the peculiar effectiveness of Western Zhou ancestral ritual, the behavioral rubric under which these various models of kinship and identity came together to create the fabric of Zhou elite society, and the crucial role of bronze vessels in its operation.

1.3: Feasting, edible sacrifices, inscribed bronze vessels, and ancestral ritual

The above section discusses the role of the zong 宗 ancestral temple as a venue for the ritual instantiation of model relations within lineages and between the royal house and its client elites. The mode of activity underlying and supporting such activities within that venue was the performance of ancestral ritual employing bronze vessels and the feasting that accompanied it.

Bronzes and the inscriptions that adorn some of them are the foundation of Western Zhou studies; they have captured the imagination of modern scholars as much as that of the ancients, and, rightly or wrongly, their discovery has become an informal standard by which archaeological finds of Western Zhou provenance are judged significant. The following section will attempt to establish a theoretical understanding of the qualities that drove the perpetuation of models of ritual behavior relying on bronze vessels and supported their status as the lynchpins of socially effective ritual.

1.3.1: The ethic of presence in bronze inscriptions and the “distributed personhood” of the

Zhou king

The ritual practices of the newly formed Zhou cultural complex laid special emphasis on the evocation of a sense of presence and immediacy of personal interaction between both living and dead members of social groups. This sense of recall of the immediate presence of the parties

64 involved in an interaction was a key feature of bronze inscriptions from the very earliest portion of the Western Zhou period on. It may be a legacy of the association of writing with the Shang oracle bone inscriptions, which show similar formal characteristics and a similar concern with precise description of the circumstances that led to the composition of the inscription. 91

The stereotypical structure of the Western Zhou bronze inscription is a case in point. At minimum, an inscription consisted of the name of either the sponsor of its production or the person, usually but not always deceased, to whom it was dedicated in a devotional sense. 92

Fuller inscriptions typically included a date ranging in complexity from the mere mention of an

important event to the specification of a day in the sixty-day cycle, the month, the moon phase,

and sometimes the time of day; a description of an event that triggered the commissioning of the

inscription, usually involving contact between the vessel sponsor and a superior; a description of

gifts received from that superior; and the aforementioned dedication. 93

The overall effect of the typical long bronze inscription was to capture the state of a set of interpersonal relationships at an optimal moment of contact and to perpetuate that state in the most durable material form available to the Zhou people, i.e. , bronze. In most cases, that moment involved contact between the representative of a kinship group and a superior power- holder, usually but not always the Zhou king. During the Western Zhou period, bronze was strongly associated with the distribution of wealth and prestige and with close contact with the

Zhou royal house, as suggested by the example of the Qin gui 禽簋 (4041), an early Western

Zhou vessel: 94

91 On the general qualities of Shang oracle bone inscriptions, see David N. Keightley, Sources of Shang History: The Oracle-Bone Inscriptions of Ancient China , Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978, 28-45. 92 The subsequent description follows Shaughnessy, Sources , 76-85. 93 On the structure of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, see Shaughnessy, Sources , 73-85. 94 The Qin gui is generally held to have been commissioned by Bo Qin, son of the Duke of Zhou; see Duandai , 28;

…禽祝，禽又（有） 祝，王易（賜）金百寽（鋝）… …Qin performed an invocation. Qin also had a full-vessel 95 invocation. The king presented [Qin] with 10 lve of metal (bronze)…

Other possibilities existed, however. Consider the following excerpt from the inscription

of the Dong gui 簋 (4322), a middle Western Zhou vessel: 96

隹（唯）六月初吉乙酉，才（在） 97 （堂）（次），戎伐 98 ， 有（司）、師氏奔追（襲）戎于 林，博（搏）戎 （胡），（朕）文母競敏 99 行，休宕氒（厥）心，永襲氒（厥）身，卑克氒（厥）啻（敵），… It was the sixth month, initial auspiciousness moon phase, day yiyou , at the Jing encampment. The Rong people attacked X. Dong led the Supervisors and the Marshals in rapidly pursuing and attacking the Rong at the forest of Zhou. In fighting the Rong and Hu, my cultured mother strove cleverly and (?) the ranks, put his (my) heart at ease, always guarded his (my) body, and humbled and defeated his [my] enemies…

In this case, Dong’s sponsoring of a vessel commemorated his good performance in and good luck in surviving a military campaign against the Rong people in which he played an important part, good fortune which he claimed was due to his deceased mother’s protection and guidance.

The notable point here for this discussion is that the Dong gui inscription does not express a general sense of gratitude toward Dong’s deceased mother; instead, it captures what Dong felt was a moment of direct and positive contact between the two of them.

The inscribing of a description of a conjunction of relations on a bronze vessel allowed its perpetuation in two ways. First, casting an inscription in bronze, the most durable material known to the Zhou people, ensured that it would last and could be read for the longest possible

Edward L. Shaughnessy, “The Duke of Zhou’s Retirement in the East and the Beginnings of the Minister- Monarch Debate in Chinese Philosophy,” EC 18 (1993), 48-50. On Bo Qin, see Shiji , 1518. A full translation appears in chapter 2. 95 The translation follows Ma’s suggested reading of the character  ; see MWX , 18 n. 3. 96 See note 71. 97 I follow MWX in reading this character as  ; see 115 n. 1. 98 The transcription of this character follows that in MWX , 115 n. 2. 99 Ibid., 115 n. 5.

66 time, and to the degree that the act of committing ideas to writing was seen as having power, it would by mimetic logic help preserve those relations in their present ideal state. 100 Second, the

use of inscribed bronzes, and the recall of the messages associated with them, in the context of

ancestral ritual would expose the participants to the set of idealized relationships portrayed in the

inscriptions. In the case of participating members of the zong temple-group to which the

dedicatee of the vessel belonged, exposure to these relationships and subsequent acting out of

their own relationships with the dedicatee via sacrifice and feasting would have inculcated in

them a sense of their own identities as both instantiations of the “nexus ancestors” responsible

for the ritual formulation of their lineage and ranked members of the present generation of that

lineage. The incorporation of rewards and recognition of subordinates into that process

reinforced the habituation of present members of the lineage to a cultural model in which

position within the lineage and closeness of the lineage to the Zhou royal house were the primary

criteria of status. 101

In his exploration of the agency of works of art, Alfred Gell has put forth the model of

“distributed personhood” as a way of understanding the capacity of an artist’s oeuvre to index

the presence of that artist and thereby to act upon people across gulfs in space and time. 102

Latour’s elaboration of the agency of non-humans highlights a limitation of the “distributed personhood” model: while it captures the ability of objects to act on humans both singly and in groups, it relies implicitly on the known connection of such groups of objects with a single,

100 On mimesis and its relationship to the idea of sympathetic magic, see the discussion in Gell, Art and Agency , 99- 101. 101 The end result of this process will have been the inculcation of a tendency to see the zong ritual system and its origin point, the Zhou royal house, as the natural and primary vehicle through which status could be recognized and prestige achieved. The early history of China does indeed show this trope, inasmuch as the Zhou royal house persisted as the ideological center of pre-Qin politics long after the waning of its temporal power. 102 On “distributed personhood,” see Gell, Art and Agency , 102-4, 228-32.

67 driving, intentional source. 103 This reliance downplays the capacity of objects to transform the messages they carry; it casts them as “intermediaries” rather than as “mediators,” in Latour’s terms. 104

The “distributed personhood” model is, however, felicitously well suited to describe the depiction of the Zhou king in the inscriptions of Western Zhou bronze vessels. The focus of bronze-inscriptional narratives on recording specific, positive moments of contact between superior and subordinate – what we may call the “ethic of presence” in bronze inscriptions – tended to keep bronze vessels toward the “intermediary” side of the scale. This customary focus on contact with superiors, and especially with the Zhou king, was just the sort of understood connection necessary to support the distributed personhood model. By and large, the long inscriptions of Western Zhou bronzes formed the administrational and ideological “oeuvre” of the Zhou king; they made the impact of his presence felt in the ritual interactions of lineages, thus forging connections between the relationships of individual elites with the royal house and the status of those elites within their lineage units and spheres of regular interaction.

These connections must have provided powerful motivation for adherent elites to conceive of themselves as participants in the Zhou state project. Their continued effectiveness at promoting a royally focused model of elite identity, however, depended on the ability of both the

Zhou royal house and the idea of ancestral ritual in general to remain relevant. Certain aspects of the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions portray the intentional and continued pursuit of such relevance.

1.3.2: Creating ancestors

103 On the agency of non-humans in the formation of groups, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 63-86. 104 On Latour’s formulation of “intermediaries” and “mediators,” see the Introduction, note 43.

Two specific aspects of the language of bronze inscriptions epitomize the potential of the ancestral cult as a context of intentional enculturation. One of these is the frequent reference made in the inscriptions to the idea of “modeling oneself” on one’s ancestors. This idea plays a role in the inscription of the He zun , cited above, wherein the Zhou king calls on the young sons of the Jing lineage to “look to” ( shi 視) their Zhou-affiliated ancestor, the Gongshi, as a model

for their own education. It is described more explicitly in a number of long inscriptions,

including, for example, that of the Shi Wang ding 師望鼎 (2812), a middle Western Zhou

vessel: 105

大師小子師朢（望）曰：不（丕）顯皇考 （宄）公，穆穆克盟（明）（厥）心，（慎）（厥）德，用辟于先王， 106 （得）屯（純）亡敃，朢（望）肈（肇）帥井（型）皇考，虔 （夙）夜出內（入）王命… Marshal Wang, scion of the Grand Marshal, says: “[My] greatly brilliant and august deceased father Duke Gui was solemnly able to enlighten his heart/mind and take care with his virtuous power. Thereby he was ruled by the former kings; he obtained purity without force. [I,] Wang, am thus led by the model of [my] august deceased father, entering and leaving day and night [according to] the royal command...”

The import of the term jing 井, read as xing 型 here, is to indicate Marshal Wang’s desire to

“shape” himself after the model of his deceased father. Further examples of this expression appear in long inscriptions from all phases of the Western Zhou period. 107 The sentiment

expressed thereby, namely that the living members of a lineage should attempt to conform to the

example of their most illustrious ancestors, is a linchpin of the model of ancestral ritual

105 MWX , 146-7, assigns it to King Gong, as does Daxi , 80-1. See also Sackler , 295-7, which dates the Shi Wang ding to the middle-late Western Zhou, and Shirakawa, 22.130, 71-80 (Shirakawa assigns the bronze to a group that he dates to King Yih). 106 I follow MWX , 146 n. 3, in transcribing the bottom element of this character as shou 手; the gloss of de 得 is shared by MWX and the AS database. 107 See the inscriptions of the Da Yu ding 大盂鼎 (2837), the Shi Zai ding 師鼎 (2830), the Liang Qi zhong 梁其鐘 (187), etc. On the dating of the Da Yu ding , see the discussion of guan 祼 in Appendix 1; on that of the Shi Zai ding , see Appendix 2, table 4.2; on the Liang Qi zhong , see MWX 397, 273-4, which suggests a dating to the King Yi-King Li period.

69 promulgated during the Western Zhou. It dovetails with the model of “nexus ancestors” seen above in the Yin Ji li and the He zun . Fundamental to the operation of ancestral ritual in the

Western Zhou context was the idea that living elites could and should reiterate the relationships

shared by their ancestors and the ancestors of their patrons, in particular those belonging to the

Zhou royal house. A necessary condition of this idea was the assumption that the living could

view and emulate the qualities possessed by their deceased patrilineal relatives. As the above

inscriptions show, many among the Zhou elite were aware of this assumption and articulated it

explicitly in the context of ancestral ritual, the venue in which living and dead members of elite

interest groups came into direct contact.

In this regard, I would like to consider the traditional ending for long bronze inscriptions,

which typically involves some variant of this phrase:

其萬年子子孙孙永保用享. May [his] sons’ sons and grandsons’ gransdons eternally treasure and use [this vessel] in pleasing [the ancestors]. 108

The final term, xiang 享, is both ubiquitous and problematic; it appears throughout the bronze

inscriptions as a general referent to activities performed with bronze vessels. Liu Yuan has

recently identified it with “long-term” devotional rites toward the ancestors, those lacking a

specific, immediate goal of communication; this must certainly be the general sense of the

term. 109 The basic idea of the phrase is clear, however; it expresses the desire that future

generations of the kinship group should continue to use the vessel in the way in which it is

employed by the sponsor of its creation, i.e., in the performance of rites within the rubric of the

zong ancestral-temple cult. At first glance this seems unproblematic. A contradiction exists,

108 The above case, for example, is taken from the inscription of the Bo yu 伯盂 (10312). 109 Liu Yuan, Shang Zhou jizuli yanjiu , 89-95.

70 however, between the expression of the desire for descendants to continue using a vessel and the frequent interment of inscribed vessels in elite tombs. 110 This contradiction can be explained, if not resolved, if we consider the mortuary practices of the Zhou elite as another venue for promoting the “model” relationship between Zhou elites and their ancestors.

The Western Zhou bronze inscriptions promote the ideal of a direct relationship between the living members of a lineage and its deceased members, one in which emulation of the behavior of the dead by the living is a key goal. In order for this emulation to be compatible with a lifestyle of participation in ancestral ritual, it would have been necessary for deceased members of the lineage to be conceptualized not only as clients of the Zhou royal house nor as mere targets of devotional activities, but as participants in the ancestral-temple ritual system in their own right. 111 In the political realm, the transmission of texts like the “Jiu gao,” which attributes the regulation of ritual among the Zhou population to the royal nexus ancestor King

Wen, must have helped in this process. 112 In the realm of ritual, however, burial practices provided an opportunity to create identities for the deceased that conformed best to the expectations and ambitions of the relatives and affiliated power-holders that survived them. 113 In

110 Of the 6076 inscribed bronzes listed in the AS database as belonging to the Western Zhou, 649 were definitively recovered from tombs (figures retrieved in April 2012). I am indebted to Professor Li Feng for the observation of this contradiction. 111 Martin Kern raises the issue of the figuration of living participants in the ancestral cult as potential ancestors; see Kern, “Bronze Inscriptions, the Shijing , and the Shangshu ,” 181. 112 See Shisanjing, “Jiu gao,” 205-6. 113 By now, many scholars have recognized the degree to which choices made in mortuary practice are a venue for the negotiation and reproduction of status relations among the living. See for example J.C. Barrett, “The Living, the Dead and the Ancestors: Neolithic and Bronze Age Mortuary Practices,” in J.C. Barrett and Ian Kinnes, eds., The Archaeology of Context in the Neolithic and Bronze Age: Recent Trends, Sheffield: Sheffield University, 1988. For a consideration of the issue in the context of an early Chinese site, see Rowan Flad, “Ritual or Structure? Analysis of Burial Elaboration at Dadianzi, Inner Mongolia,” JEAA 3.3-4 (2001), 23-51. Falkenhausen relates the ongoing debate about the constitutive power of burial to the Zhou Dynasty archaeological record in Chinese Society , 74-6.

71 the Zhou elite cultural context, this frequently took the form of the inclusion of bronze vessels in tombs with the deceased. 114

The inclusion of ancestral-ritual vessels in elite funerary ritual must have been a powerful tool in composing identities for the deceased as active participants in the ancestral cults of their lineages whose characteristic activities included the need to perform sacrifices. 115 Allowing

survivors to conceive of their deceased in this way would have been important to the overall goal

of promoting emulation of the ancestors as moral individuals and ideal citizens of the Zhou

polity, as it would have allowed them to pursue that goal through ritual practices that were

established as envisioned components of the ancestors’ behavior. It would also have tied the

pursuit of prestige and status more directly to the ancestral cult, since elites seeking to call on the

precedent of their bloodlines as justification for their status looked back to ancestors whose

identities had been publicly located within the rubric of ancestral ritual. The result, we may

expect, would be a strong motivation for Zhou elites to describe themselves in terms of their

relationships to their ancestors and their kin groups, and indeed, the above observations on

developmental trends in kin terminology and forms of address tend to confirm that assumption.

1.3.3: Creating lineages

Overall, Zhou ancestral-ritual practice tended to move in this direction of explicit

identification between living elites and their ancestors over the course of the period. As will be

discussed in Chapter 4, it was codified during the mid-Western Zhou within the royal

114 In the Western Zhou cemetery at Zhangjiapo, for example, 41 of the 439 tombs excavated, or about 9.3%, contained what the excavators call “ritual and musical implements” ( 礼乐器). See Zhangjiapo , 132. 115 In comparison, McAnany has suggested that the burial of ritual feasting ceramics in Classic Maya tombs acted as a record of ritual feasts in which the deceased participated; see Patricia A. McAnany, Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in Ancient Maya Society , Austin: University of Texas Press, 1995, 33. In such a scenario, the audience for the “chronicle of ritual feasts” under consideration would consist of 1) the relatives responsible for the interment, who would be familiar with the tomb’s contents, and 2) the participants in the interment ritual.

72 appointment inscriptions, which often note the appointees’ connections to ancestors who held the offices to which they were assigned. 116 It is of note, then, that detailed formulations of individual elite Zhou lineages do not appear in the inscriptions until the middle Western Zhou period. Only three well-known inscriptions, the Shi Qiang pan 史牆盤 (10175), the Xing zhong

鐘 (246-55), and the Lai pan 逨盤 (NA0757), record the ancestral lines of their sponsors in detail. 117 It is plausible that some groups holding elite status in Western Zhou society were not

in the habit of tracing patrilineal descent and so had no ancestral lines of which to boast until

they had been integrated into the zong system for some time. Others, however, particularly those

who had until recently maintained affiliation with or even belonged to Shang aristocratic families,

must have had this information available. 118 The Jing group mentioned in the He zun inscription

is a likely example; yet in his address therein, the king refers not to the antiquity of the Jing name,

but to the example of the Gongshi who was the point of contact between that kin group and the

Zhou royal house.

In the context of Western Zhou ancestral ritual, then, the rebellion of King Wen seems to have constituted a watershed moment beyond which ancestral lines were traced back no further.

It appears that there was a strong sense among ritually active Zhou elites, especially during the early Western Zhou, that ancestral lines were relevant only insofar as they led back to

116 On the extent of hereditary associations with specific offices in the Western Zhou government, see Bureaucracy , 190-217. 117 For a combined discussion of these bronzes, see Chinese Society , 56-70, esp. 70. On the discovery of the Lai pan , see Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo, Baoji shi kaogu gongzuodui, and Meixian wenhuaguan, “Shaanxi Meixian Yangjiacun Xi Zhou qingtongqi jiaocang fajue jianbao,” Wenwu 2003.6, 4-42. See also Shaanxi sheng wenwuju, Shengshi jijin: Shaanxi Baoji Meixian qingtongqi jiaocang , Beijing: Beijing, 2003. For discussion of the vessel as evidence for the sequence of the Western Zhou royal line, see also Edward L. Shaughnessy, “The Writing of a Late Western Zhou Bronze Inscription,” Asiatische Studien 51.3 (2007), 854-77; Matsui Yoshinori, “Western Zhou History in the Collective Memory of the People of the Western Zhou: An Interpretation of the Inscription of the ‘Lai pan,’” Toyoushi kenkyuu 66.4 (2008), 664-712. 118 The structure of Shang elite kinship and inheritance is still a subject of debate, but based on the oracle bone inscriptions, it can at least be said that Shang aristocrats related directly to the royal family must have been aware of the identities of their patrilineal ancestors. For the Shang royal ancestral line as reconstructed from the OBI, see David N. Keightley, “The Shang,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 234.

73 connections with the Zhou royal house or, in the case of relatively low-status elites, to higher- ranked elites with connections to the royal house. This concern with royal affiliations may indicate that the zong ancestral-ritual system in general was first disseminated among various

allies of the Zhou by the Zhou royal house, as the beginning of the “Jiu gao” and the passage

from the “Luo gao” that opens this chapter suggest; alternatively, it may reflect the close

connection between the creation of inscribed bronze vessels and political relations with the Zhou

kings. It is also a manifestation of the ethic of presence in Zhou ancestral ritual, in that moments

of real contact between allied elites had to be reiterated and relived by current generations of

participants in order for their lineage identities to remain relevant.

1.3.4: Reporting in the presence of the ancestors

One aspect of the creation of identity as an elite lineage member, then, was the

reinstantiation of client relations with the Zhou royal house. 119 In the environment of the early

Western Zhou state, however, it was of course not always possible for important interactions between powerful elites and their clients to take place at the clients’ ancestral temples; this was the exception rather than the norm. A ritual mechanism existed whereby such interactions that took place elsewhere could be incorporated into the ritual and social life of the local kin group; this was the gao 告, “report” or “announcement,” to one’s ancestors. 120 A classic, simple

119 On the precise nature of the relationships between the Zhou kings and their clients, see Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” 283-90; Li Feng, “Feudalism and Western Zhou China: A Criticism,” HJAS 63.1 (June 2003), 115-44. 120 I am indebted to Liu Yu, Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli , 503-5, for his observations on the process of announcing events to the ancestors, although I do not agree with his interpretations in every case (I am not sure, for example, that the inscription of the Ze Ling fangyi describes a report to the ancestors rather than to a living authority figure). Much of the subsequent discussion is based on his work.

74 example appears in the early Western Zhou inscription of the Shu gui 殳簋 (4136), wherein Shu

announces to his deceased father the receipt of material rewards from his patron, Xianghou: 121

隹（唯）五月乙亥，相侯休于（厥）臣殳，易（賜）帛金，殳揚侯休，告于文考，用乍（作），其萬年□ 待 □ □ 侯。 On day yihai of the fifth month, Xianghou showed beneficence toward his servant Shu, awarding him silk and metal. Shu praises the hou ’s beneficence and reports it to his cultured deceased father. [He] thereby makes a revered gui -vessel. May [he] for ten thousand years…attend…the hou .

One of the longest and most detailed inscriptions of the early Western Zhou, the Mai fangzun 麥

方尊 (6015), records the performance of an announcement to the ancestors after a royal audience in which the presentee was shown unusual favor by the Zhou king. The full inscription appears in chapter 5; the relevant portions are reproduced below:

王令辟井（邢）侯出坏，侯于井（邢），若二月，侯見于宗周，亡（尤）… 唯歸，（揚）天子休，告亡尤，用 （恭）義（儀）寧侯， 考于井（邢）侯。乍（作）冊麥易（賜）金于辟侯… The king commanded the sovereign Marquis of Xing to come out from Huai and take up the Marquisate of Xing. Around the second month, the Marquis presented himself at Zongzhou; there were no problems…When he returned, he praised the beneficence of the Son of Heaven and reported that (the trip) went without incident. He thereby conducted a respectful ceremony for Marquis Ning (the Peaceful Marquis), and had an audience with (?) his deceased father as the Marquis of Xing. 122 Document Maker Mai received a gift of metal from the sovereign Marquis…(Mai fangzun [6015])

On returning to his home base, the newly installed Marquis ( hou 侯) of Xing found it necessary to report to his deceased father on the completion of the trip without incident and the extraordinary consideration shown him by the king. Document Maker Mai may have traveled to

121 MWX , 92, assigns the Shu gui to the early Western Zhou. 122 The syntax of this clause is unusual. My sense is that the Marquis is greeting his deceased father for the first time as the recognized Marquis of Xing. MWX , on the other hand, reads it as meaning that Document Maker Mai “respectfully and majestically set the Marquis [of Xing] at ease”; see MWX , 47, n. 17. Li Feng follows this reading as well in Bureaucracy , 262.

Zongzhou with the new Marquis; based on the timing of his receipt of a gift from the Marquis, it is likely that he also took part in the report-ceremony that the Marquis conducted after his return.

The Mai fangzun narrative depicts a cascade effect in the distribution of prestige. At

Zongzhou, the Marquis of Xing participated in a ritual with the king as part of his appointment, thereby accruing prestige and wealth (in the form of royal gifts) for himself. On his return, the need to report this event to his ancestors necessitated the involvement of a specialist scribe, who would have witnessed this ritual process of recognition of prestige within the context of the ancestral line. When he received a reward for his involvement, that scribe (Mai) then seized the opportunity to cast a bronze for use in ancestral ritual. The inscription of that bronze traced the sequence of events back to their origin in an interaction between his patron and the Zhou king, thus connecting him with the royal house second-hand within the context of the ancestral cult.

At every step in the sequence, then, ritual acted as the context for the assignation of prestige and the distribution of wealth and power. The gao -report to the ancestors was the connecting point between the various figures – the king, the Marquis, the marquesal ancestors, Mai, other members of the marquesal lineage – with an interest in the details of that distribution.

The model of the announcement to the ancestors at the local level of privilege afforded elsewhere makes manifest a corollary of the ethic of presence in Zhou ritual. Within the confines of the zong ritual system, the understanding was that ancestors did not necessarily observe the fortunes of their descendants constantly. In other words, they were not ubiquitously present, but instead needed to be made present, or at least made attentive, through the appropriate performance of ritual acts. 123 The fact of the presence of the ancestors in a ritual context was a source of the differential value which Bell characterizes as the basic quality of ritualized

123 In the middle-late Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, the achievement of this goal was sometimes described with the term jiang 降, “to descend/to send down,” or the compound phrase zhijiang 郅降; see for example the inscriptions of the Xing zhong , the Shanfu Ke xu 膳夫克盨 (4465), etc.

76 action. 124 This conception of differentiated presence provided motivation for reporting to the ancestors occurrences that took place outside the rubric of the zong in order to get credit for them, as it were, within the context of the lineage.

The term gao appears frequently throughout the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions referring to the offering of reports to living superiors by their subordinates, and the practice of reporting one’s accomplishments to the ancestors was probably seen as one form of that process. 125 The practice of reporting to the ancestors was not, however, restricted to elites in subordinate positions. Prototypical examples exist wherein the potentates of the Zhou royal house were said to announce their accomplishments to the s pirits as well. We have seen one of these in the inscription of the He zun :

隹（唯）（武）王既克大邑商，則廷告于天，曰：余其宅茲中或（國），自之（乂）民… When King Wu had already conquered the great city of Shang, he then went on to announce it to Heaven, saying, ‘I shall dwell in these central states and from there govern the people.’

This description of King Wu’s report to Heaven prefigures the formulation of the Western Zhou king as the “Son of Heaven” ( tianzi 天子) that was to emerge by the reign of King Kang. 126 In light of that model, we may perhaps understand it as an incidence of the process of reporting to the ancestors.

124 Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice ,108 -10. 125 See for example the inscriptions of the Jing ding 静鼎 (NA1795), the Shi Qi ding 史旂鼎 (2809), and the Duoyou ding 多友鼎 (2835). 126 The phrase tianzi appears in a number of inscriptions of likely King Kang date, including the Rong gui 榮簋 (4121), the Xian gui 獻簋 (4205), and the Mai fangzun 麥方尊 (6015). The Rong gui dates to the early Western Zhou, and probably to King Kang; see Duandai , 126-7; Shirakawa 11.59, 591-607; Sackler , 420. MWX , 555, Daxi , 45-6, and Shirakawa 9.49, 513, all date the Xian gui to King Kang. On the dating of the Mai fangzun , see the discussion of its full inscription in chapter 5.

The second, and perhaps the most famous, incidence of a Western Zhou “royal” figure

performing an announcement to the ancestors occurs in the “Jin teng” chapter of the Shangshu.

When his brother King Wu is experiencing an illness, the Duke of Zhou, Dan, arranges for a

ritual to be conducted wherein he offers himself to the spirits as a substitute. The description of

his efforts is one of the most detailed narratives of a ritual performance known from pre-Warring

States China. The passage below is from Legge’s translation, still relevant; I have changed only

the transliteration of the names:

Two years after the conquest of the Shang dynasty, the king fell ill, and was quite disconsolate. The two dukes said, “Let us reverently consult the tortoise concerning the king”; 127 but the duke of Zhou said, “You may not so distress our former kings.” He then took the business on himself, and made three altars of earth, on the same cleared space; and having made another altar on the south, facing the north, he there took his own position. The convex symbols were put on their altars and he himself held his mace, while he addressed ( gao 告) the kings Tai, Ji, and Wen…128

In fact, unlike the examples of the gao we have seen above, Dan’s “report” to his

ancestors, the former Zhou kings, was more in the nature of a request for clemency for King Wu.

The use of the term gao conveys an impression of perceived obligation, a sense that the Duke of

Zhou not only hopes that the ancestors will accede to his request, but expects their cooperation as

an acknowledgement of his superior character and good service. It is also an implicit claim to

royalty, in that the Duke presents himself as an equivalent exchange for King Wu and, in fact, a

superior selection, based on his piety and ability to serve the ancestral spirits.

127 That is, conduct pyromantic divinations concerning the matter using tortoise shells. The Zhou employed Shang- style pyromantic divination for some time, although it evidently occupied a different place in their society. The key source on Western Zhou oracle bone inscriptions is Cao Wei, Zhouyuan jiaguwen , Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2002, which contains high-quality photographs of the Zhouyuan bones and reproduces data from several other sources. For further sources on the Zhouyuan oracle bones, see the discussion of yu 禦 in chapter 2. 128 Legge, The Shoo King , 351-2.

Certain characteristics of the “Jin teng” passage, in particular the name-list of the former kings, suggest a post-Western Zhou date. 129 Liu Yu has noted that the use of the term gao to indicate an announcement directed to the ancestors survived into the later received texts. 130

However, in a close examination of the use of the term gao , I have found no examples of reports to the ancestors in inscriptions dated to after the early Western Zhou; the term appears frequently in vessels dating to the late Western Zhou in particular but almost always indicates a report made to a living superior, usually the king. 131 It seems that the motivation to report one’s positive experiences in the ancestral temple subsided fairly early in the Western Zhou period; or, alternatively, that the need to record that one had done so in inscriptions subsided.

The cessation of the gao -report directed towards one’s patrilineal ancestors was related to a process of systematization of royal involvement in the ritual distribution of prestige. A host of changes that took place around the middle of the Western Zhou period reflect changing royal attitudes toward the ancestral-ritual institution, its associated model of kinship, and its role in

Zhou politics. Among the factors behind these changes was, I believe, royal concern with the growing role of lineage identity in Zhou society and, to use Beaudrillard’s terms, the inevitable tendency of “ascribed value” to become “inherited value.”132 I will return to this point later in the chapter; here I will simply say that, under this model, the reappearance of the gao to the ancestors in Eastern Zhou sources might reflect not a resurgence of earlier religious practice, but a decline in the proportional representation of royal interests in the inscriptional and written record.

129 To my knowledge, the name Taiwang or Taigong wang appears nowhere in the Western Zhou inscriptions. 130 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli,” Kaogu xuebao 1989.4, 503-5. 131 For examples, see note 124. 132 James Benedict, tr., Jean Beaudrillard, The System of Objects , London, New York: Verso, 2005, “The Market in Antiques,” 88-9.

1.3.5: Feasting and ritual participation

For ritual to be effective as a venue for the iteration and transformation of social identities, it must create opportunities for group interaction, and it must provide motivation for people who consider themselves or are considered to belong to those groups to take part.

Without a doubt, the group activity most evident from the Western Zhou archaeological and historical record is the feast, thanks largely to the central role played by inscribed bronze vessels in the material-culture assemblages of the Zhou elite. Rawson thus begins her assessment of

Western Zhou archaeology by stating the importance of bronze vessels, and in particular those with inscriptions, to the understanding of the archaeological record. 133

As we know it from that record and from the inscriptions, the elite feasting of the early

Western Zhou belonged to what Dietler has characterized as the “diacritical feasting pattern,” which is to say that it involved the use of specialized, highly developed paraphernalia and unusual provisions available only to certain privileged segments of the population. 134 The inclusion of food vessels in tombs was a pervasive characteristic of mortuary practice across the sphere of Zhou influence, indicating an enduring importance of the act of eating in social relations and the concomitant need to portray one’s dead as requiring provisions for that purpose. 135 The inclusion of bronze vessels specifying their use in ancestral ritual, however, seems to have been rarer. Of the 27 tombs associated with the Yu state cemetery at Baoji, for example, eleven contained no bronze food vessels, while all but four contained ceramic food

133 Rawson, Western Zhou Archaeology , in Cambridge History , 352. 134 Michael Dietler, “Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy: Food, Power, and Status in Prehistoric Europe,” in Polly Wiessner and Wulf Schiefenhovel, eds., Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Providence: Berghahn Books, 1996, 86-126, esp. 98. Cited in Lisa J. Lecount, “Like Water for Chocolate: Feasting and Political Ritual among the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize,” American Anthropologist , new series, 103.4 (Dec. 2001), 935. 135 On the question of burial as a constitutive act for the deceased vs. the living, see note 112 above.

80 vessels (table 1.2, Appendix 2).136 Even among early Western Zhou elites, then, a division pertained between those individuals eligible to participate in lineage ritual and those with the wherewithal, financial or prestige-based, to produce bronze vessels for the purpose. 137

Feasting activities created a variety of opportunities for group interaction and participation, from the production of the food consumed, to the performance of associated rituals, to the disposal of the remains. Offering foodstuffs to ancestors, and the concomitant consumption of those foodstuffs by the participants, afforded opportunities for the creation and re-creation of prestation relationships between elites through both the provision of hospitality – i.e., food, wine, and company – and the possibility of reward for services rendered in the context of the meal and its accompanying rituals. 138 It also encouraged participants to associate successful agriculture, and the abundance it produced, with the operation of the zong temple cult,

in which context that abundance was recognized and consumed. 139

Feasting provided an audience for the constitution of individual identities within the

context of the ancestral lineage. The audience probably consisted largely of the members of the

lineage, but it was not necessarily limited to them; associates of the sponsors could potentially

take part. A few bronzes record their creation for this specific purpose:

先（獸）乍（作）朕老（考）寶鼎，（獸）其邁（萬）年永寶用，朝夕鄉（饗）（厥）多倗（朋）友。

136 Baoji Yu guo mudi , 96, 132. The situation of one of these tombs, BRM3, is quite unusual, in that it is very large, but contains almost no grave goods, and its occupant shows signs of having been strangled to death; see ibid., 385-6. It should not be taken as a useful example of elite burial assemblages. 137 This distinction would only expand over the course of the Western Zhou period, as the introduction of vessel sets meant that a higher proportion of bronzes were produced by a smaller proportion of potential patrons. 138 Cook, Wealth and the Western Zhou. Examples of rewards granted in the context of feasts are too many to list here. 139 In his discussion of the term bao 報 in the inscriptions, Liu Yu characterizes the poem “Wei qing,” from the “Zhou song” section of the Shi ¸ as describing a ceremony of repayment of the ancestors for a bountiful harvest. See Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli,” 507; Shijing, “Wei qing,” Shisanjing zhushu , 584. I concur with Liu Yu’s assessment of the poem but am hesitant about his characterization of bao as a specific rite; I would instead call it a frequently expressed sentiment.

[I,] Xianshou, make a precious, revered vessel for my deceased father. May [I,] Shou, eternally treasure and use it for ten thousand years, feasting my many friends and colleagues day and night. (Xian Shou ding 先獸鼎 [2655]) 140

隹（唯）十又一月，井（邢）侯 （延）141 （囋）于麥。麥易（賜）赤金，用乍（作）鼎，用從井（邢）侯征事，用鄉（饗）多者（諸）友。 It was the eleventh month. Xinghou extended praise to Mai. Mai was given red metal with which he makes a ding -cauldron, thereby to follow Xinghou on campaign and in service, and thereby to feast his many and various colleagues. (Mai fangding 麥方鼎 [2706]) 142

The casting of a vessel for the purpose of hosting feasts for non-lineage members did not exclude its devotional intent within the ancestral sphere, as shown by the inscription of the Wei ding 衛

鼎 (2733), a mid-Western Zhou bronze: 143

衛肈（肇）乍（作）（厥）文考己中（仲）寶將（），用ȼ壽、匄永福，乃用鄉（饗）王出入事（使）人，眔多倗（朋）友，子孫永寶。 Wei begins the making of a precious jiang -cauldron for his cultured deceased father Jizhong, thereby to make entreaty for long life and pray for lasting fortune, and thereby to feast the royal emissaries that come and go, as well as [his] many friends and colleagues; [may his] sons and grandsons long treasure [it].

Wei had no qualms about describing his intent to use the bronze in hosting outsiders while maintaining its efficacy as a medium of prayer to and request of the ancestors. 144 The inscription

describes a nested set of relationships coming together in the context of the feast. Wei and the

members of his lineage would have interacted with his “friends and colleagues,” local elites from

140 Xian Shou ding 先獸鼎 (2655), dated by the AS database to the early Western Zhou; see also Sandai 3.51.3, Jinwen zongji 1144, vol. 2, 511. 141 The transcription of this character follows that given in MWX, 48; the gloss is that of the AS database. 142 The Mai fangding was cast by the same individual as the Mai fangzun , discussed at length in Chapter 5; like that bronze, it probably dates to the reign of King Cheng or King Kang. 143 On the date of the Wei ding , see Shirakawa 8.36, 405-7. Shirakawa assigns the Wei ding to the latter half of the early Western Zhou (King Kang or later), while the AS database dates it to the middle Western Zhou. Based on the relatively naturalistic bird ornamentation on the vessel, my sense is that the former is probably the correct dating. 144 In early Western Zhou contexts, the term hui Ο refers to a specific rite of entreaty to the ancestors; see the discussion in chapter 2.

82 outside his kin group with whom he shared a professional or personal acquaintance. As a collective, this “local” contingent would then apparently have had the occasional opportunity to interact with representatives of the Zhou royal house. The inclusion of royal messengers must have been an especially powerful motivator for the performance of feasts, affording Wei the opportunity to demonstrate his wealth (through the display of bronzes and the distribution of largesse) and to cultivate prestigious extra-lineage relationships in the context of lineage activities. 145

Some of the nuances of the operation of bronzes and their inscriptions might have been lost on outside observers, lacking as they did the context to associate specific bronzes with specific individuals, etc. Fortunately, early Zhou ritual included an auditory element to overcome this issue in the form of the “invocation” ( zhu 祝). The office of Invoker is well

attested in early Western Zhou inscriptions; it was most famously held by Qin 禽, son of the

Duke of Zhou (Zhougong), as mentioned in the Dazhu Qin ding 大祝禽鼎 (“Great Invoker Qin ding ”) (1937-8) and the Qin gui 禽簋 (4041), quoted above. It appears in inscriptions of middle

and late Western Zhou date as well. 146 Little detail appears in these inscriptions concerning the

Invoker’s duties; however, the existence of such an office suggests that, at least in its early stages,

Western Zhou ancestral ritual involved the intoning of prayers to ancestors by dedicated specialists. Such prayers must have helped contextualize the ritual for observers, providing information on the nexus ancestors of the lineage and the commemoration of prestige-receiving

145 See for example the Shen ding (2732), cast by the Grand Scribe of Ying for “entertaining.” 146 See the Shen guigai 申簋蓋 (4267), the Chang Xin he 長盉 (9455), and the Qian gui  簋 (4296). A more detailed discussion appears in the section on zhu -invocation in chapter 2.

83 events that was otherwise available mainly through the inscriptions, most of which were obscured by food and drink during the course of the feast. 147

1.3.6: Sets of bronzes and sets of ancestors

The power of bronzes as representations of their owners in the material accoutrements of the ancestral cult depended not just on when and by whom they were produced, but also on the quantities and combinations in which they were used. Influential discussions of the use of bronzes in Western Zhou ritual and feasting have focused on this topic. 148 Information comes from two diverse contexts: tombs in which assemblages of bronze vessels have been buried, which have been assumed to represent individual “sets” within the context of the ancestral cult; 149 and hoards, which comprise large groups of vessels belonging to entire lineages (or

lineage branches) and which are interpreted as the furnishings of zong temples. 150 Both hoards

and bronze-rich tombs thus provide vital examples of combinations of bronze vessels that were

significant to Western Zhou elites under specific circumstances.

A primary concern of ancestral ritual was the composition of a set of mutually similar

ancestors, resembling what Dumont has termed a “collective individual,” of which any particular

living participant was a recent iteration. 151 The ethic of identification with the “nexus ancestor”

147 For a more detailed speculation on the performance required of the Invoker, see Liu Yu, Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli , 516-7. 148 See Chinese Society , 98-111; Rawson in Cambridge History , 369-75. See also Guo Baojun, Shang Zhou tongqiqun zonghe yanjiu , Beijing: Wenwu, 1981. 149 Sackler , 98-9. 150 See Chinese Society , 36-7. On Western Zhou bronze hoards, see Luo Xizhang, “Zhouyuan qingtongqi jiaocang jiqi youguan wenti de tantao,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1988.2, 40-7. 151 On the creation of individual identities as instances of a shared group identity, see the concern for the “collective individual” in Louis Dumont, “Religion, Politics, and Society in the Individualistic Universe,” Proceedings of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland , 1970, 31-41, esp. 33; and its application to ancestral devotions in Robert J. Foster, “Nurture and Force-Feeding: Mortuary Feasting and the Construction of Collective Individuals,” American Ethnologist 17.3 (Aug. 1990), 431-48. For an example of the mediation of circumstantial pressures against the iterative capacity of ancestral ritual, see Rasmussen, “The Spirit of the Gift among the Tuareg,” 27-36.

84 of one’s temple lineage, the prototypical “first among equals” in the collective, was a driving force behind this concern. Personal identification with the bronzes used in the ritual formed part of this conceptual complex. The ethic of presence manifest in the content of bronze inscriptions facilitated this process, as many bronzes marked occasions of personal involvement in prestigious events and thus indexed the presence of the vessel sponsor. As vessels sponsored by various elites were brought together and displayed in the ancestral temple, then, the group of elites making up the lineage, assembled for the purpose of the rite, was physically represented in the set of vessels assembled for the offerings.

Since the personal contribution of each lineage member to the vessel assemblage would have varied according to his or her financial and political wherewithal, the assemblage would therefore make up a hierarchical image in which members were portrayed as making up different proportions of their lineage. At the same time, the dedications of specific bronzes to specific ancestors, along with the rhetoric of the rite itself, meant that the assemblage of bronzes also indexed the overall structure of the lineage, i.e., the series of ancestors that made up the

“collective individual.” This overlapping conjunction of images (bronze assemblage, set of ancestors commemorated by the bronzes, differential participation in the lineage as depicted by proportional representation in the bronzes) operated mimetically in the context of the rite, habituating lineage members to conceive of themselves as individual iterations of the nexus ancestor in a set of such iterations, as components situated in the hierarchy of the lineage in its present state, and, together with the other living participants, as a “collective individual” again iterating the overall “collective individual” formed by the total membership of the lineage, living and dead.

Greater representation within the set of bronzes used in ritual constituted claim to being a greater “part” of the lineage. Over the course of the Western Zhou period, the valuation of proportional representation in the assemblage of ritual bronzes became explicit as complicated décor subsided and sets of numerous identical vessels, typically with identical inscriptions, began to be produced. 152 Creation of such sets allowed vessel sponsors to stretch the limits of the opportunities created by events of prestige conferral for the production of bronzes. Initially, this was probably one way in which elites could counteract disparities in economic wealth and ritual status. Eventually the practice of casting multiple-vessel sets would become codified, as described in the ritual books, wherein it was claimed that aristocrats of particular ranks had the right to different numbers of ding -cauldrons and gui -vessels. 153

It is perhaps not coincidental that this shift occurred concurrently with the accrual of ancestral “sets” as portrayed in the inscriptions. Under the Western Zhou ancestral-ritual model, as discussed above, the lifetimes of Kings Wen and Wu constituted the terminus ante quem for the formulation of ritual lineages. Some time passed, then, before the concept of the lineage-as- set could develop vertical as well as horizontal depth – that is, before enough generations had passed since the lives of the nexus ancestors that lineage members could look back on a series of antecedents with whom they shared primarily “descendant-ancestor” rather than specific familial relationships. 154 By the middle Western Zhou, some evidence exists of this process. Three famous bronzes, the Shi Qiang pan 史墻盤, the Xing zhong 鐘, and the Lai pan , 逨盤, record

152 See Rawson, "Western Zhou Archaeology," 433-40. 153 The actual numbers of vessels assigned to specific ranks are unclear; see Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 43-52, 56-64. Falkenhausen notes that the differences in the numbers of vessels in sets initially differentiated between lineage members rather than lineages; see ibid., 100. Falkenhausen, ibid., argues that the sumptuary rules for vessel sets described in the ritual books were instituted during the late Western Zhou; I am not yet convinced that such rules were systemically applied. It is certain, however, that sponsoring vessel sets was a primary strategy of status negotiation in the ancestral-ritual context by that time. 154 In Marcus’s terms, before lineages developed a distinction between “near” and “distant or remote” ancestors. See Joyce Marcus, “Women’s Ritual in Formative Oaxaca: Figurine-making, Divination, Death, and the Ancestors,” Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, no. 33, Ann Arbor, 1998, 20-1.

86 sequences of ancestors of specific lineages in tandem with descriptions of the sequence of Zhou kings. 155 Falkenhausen has suggested that this was an act of competitive representation in that the lineages concerned placed their accomplishments on a par with those of the Zhou royal house. 156 The point is well taken, but I would suggest another interpretation: by listing the sequence of the royal house along with that of their ancestors, the Wei lineage members157

described the members of their ancestral line as a sequential set of successful iterations of the

“nexus ancestor” (the gaozu 高祖 or “High Ancestor” of the Shi Qiang pan inscription) and his relationship with the Zhou king. 158 The recording of lineage sequences was the flip side of the concurrently beginning practice of referring to individuals with terms indicating their lineage seniority, observed by Falkenhausen and noted above in the discussion on shi 氏 in the inscriptions. 159 Along with the characterization of the lineage as a sequential “collection” of ancestors went the conceptualization of individual identities as positions within that sequence.

The above model proposes that the Zhou practiced partial individual participation in rituals involving vessel assemblages. This idea is dependent on the assumption that a Zhou elite could sponsor one or two bronzes, take them to the ancestral temple, and see them used as his contribution to the process. While such an assumption seems logical, I am not aware of any direct evidence to support it. A precedent exists, however, in the genre of bronzes that were cast for “portable” purposes, i.e., for elites to use while on campaign with the king or another

155 See note 116. 156 Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 71. 157 The Shi Qiang pan and the Xing zhong were produced by members of the same lineage and so record essentially the same sequence of ancestors. 158 For a detailed translation of the Shi Qiang pan inscription, see Shaughnessy, Sources , 1-4, 183-92. If the point was to describe the Wei ancestors as iterations of a certain relationship with the Zhou king, one might expect the inscription to consist entirely of paired, contextualized descriptions of Wei ancestors and their relationships with kings, as in the portion dedicated to the High Ancestor and his relationship with King Wu. Such is the case with the inscriptions of the Xing zhong and the Lai pan ; the actual arrangement of the Shi Qiang pan inscription affords the royal house pride of place in all cases. 159 Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 69-70; see also Sheng Dongling, “Xi Zhou tongqi mingwen zhong de renming jiqi dui duandai de yiyi,” Wenshi 17, 27-64, cited therein.

87 superior. 160 Evidently there were some rituals conducted during military campaigns for which elite personnel were expected, or at least allowed, to furnish bronzes. If this type of ritual participation was allowed in a military context, then it is likely that the members of a lineage enjoyed similar privileges of participation on the level of the local lineage temple.

1.4: Conclusion

The above pages argue that the Western Zhou royal house operated within and arbitrated the model of zong lineage ritual, acting as its primary source of prestige and the hub of its operation. Non-royal power holders, some of whom may have come from different cultures and maintained different models of kinship, established zong locally as a ritually sanctioned venue for the negotiation of social relationships, both with the king and within their own lineages.

These zong operated on the principle of reiteration of the lineage’s “nexus ancestor,” the member of the lineage responsible for its relationship with the Zhou royal house, by the current generation of participants. This ideal was expressed explicitly in frequent exhortations for Zhou elites to ”model themselves” ( xing 型) after their ancestors.

In its initial stages, this process derived much of its force from the strong “ethic of presence” underpinning Zhou ritual, wherein immediate moments of interaction with both ancestors and living authority figures were imbued with value, recorded in detail, and perpetuated through techniques of materialization such as preservation in bronze. Over time, as more generations accrued between the founding moment of the dynasty and the present, the sequence of identification and reiteration led lineages to resemble a set of ancestors of which the

160 As indicated by the use of the term lü 旅; see for example the inscriptions of the Zuoce Hu you 作册卣 (5432), the Shao qi 召器 (10360), the Zhou Hu you 周乎卣 (5406), the Shi Ke xu 師克盨 (NA1907), etc. Ma proposes a different explanation of this term as “[a vessel] for nourishment”; see MWX , 36 n. 4.

88 youngest members of the lineage formed the final item. In the context of ancestral ritual, this model of the lineage as set was echoed mimetically in the bronze assemblages used, which comprised representations of the “collective individual” that was the lineage. The ethic of the set eventually came to be expressed directly in the creation of large numbers of identical bronzes, which allowed their casters to dominate the symbolic space of the bronze assemblage and to dilute the direct link between prestige-conferral events and the casting of bronze vessels.

Models of personal identity and its relationship to kin identity among Zhou elites changed over the period, likely in response to demographic changes, and this was reflected in the inscriptions of ritual bronzes. Xing 姓 clan/surname/marriage-group terms emerged in the early

Western Zhou and increased significantly in use over the course of the period, providing an alternative model of kinship that cross-cut the lineage system, but articulated with it in the context of ancestral ritual through the forging of affinal ties and the casting of dowry bronzes.

The use of both lineage seniority terms and xing terms as exclusive identity markers in conjunction with the generic honorific suffix shi 氏 increased as well; eventually, by the end of the period, that suffix came to be used to denote lineages rather than individuals. Generally speaking, in the context of ancestral ritual, kinship identity seems to have gained ground at the expense of individual identity. This may reflect the success of the royal project of habituation of its coalition of elites in the context of lineage ritual; it likely also relates to shifts in power between the royal house and regional lineages. This process, and the changes made in royal ritual in response to it, will be explored in subsequent chapters. 161

In some cultural contexts, an effort is made to secure the boundaries between ancestor,

living elder, and young, mature member of the lineage through specific naming practices,

161 On the reflection of this process in the changing character of Zhou ritual, see Cook, "Wealth and the Western Zhou," 256-7.

89 ceremonies, etc. 162 In Western Zhou elite ritual, the opposite motivation pertained, in that effort was made in the context of mortuary rites, etc., to ensure that even young elites could identify themselves directly with their ancestors, recreating them in their own persons so as to perpetuate ideal models of relationships both vertically (i.e., hierarchically within the lineage) and horizontally (between lineage members and outside parties, including but not limited to the Zhou kings). This model of the relationship between living and dead members of lineages directly satisfied the needs of the royal house first in bringing together a coalition of diverse populations in opposition to the Shang, and then in holding them together through a project of unprecedented expansion and consolidation. The final chapter of this work will explore the ritual manifestations of royal strategies in these contexts in further detail.

162 For a case in which the creation of distance between ancestors (living and dead) and the young, including the intentional forgetting of the names of ancestors, played a key role in the social operation of the ancestral cult, see Susan J. Rasmussen, “Alms, Elders, and Ancestors: The Spirit of the Gift among the Tuareg,” Ethnology 39.1 (2000), 15-38, esp. 19, 35.

CHAPTER 2 TAKING PART AND TAKING OVER: WESTERN ZHOU ANCESTRAL RITES AS SOCIAL OBJECTS 1

2.1: Introduction

With the defeat of the Shang, the Zhou royal house positioned itself at the ideological center of a network of groups defined, in the context of their interaction with the Zhou state, by their patrilineal descent from figures sharing personal relationships with the early kings. To maintain their central position in the new hierarchy, and to pursue their project of state-building through delegation of authority, the Zhou kings drew on one of their primary cultural advantages: their familiarity with Shang-style ancestral ritual. In doing so, the Zhou royal family faced the challenge of retooling the well-established Shang ritual system, centered on a supreme lineage tracing its ancestry back more than twenty generations, to cater to the needs of a recently forged coalition of elite populations.

Royal ancestral ceremonies, performed publicly as part of major hospitality events, served the dual purpose of reinforcing recognition of the king’s role as arbiter of prestige in Zhou elite society and inculcating principles of Zhou social organization. High-ranking elites attended these ceremonies, took part in them, hosted them, and duplicated them within their own domains, in some cases at the express recommendation of the king. They cast inscribed bronzes commemorating their attendance, encoding the ceremonies in durable physical form, and used them in their own ancestral cults and burial practices, appropriating them as tools for building

1 In choosing the term “social objects” I have in mind its use in Annemarie Mol and John Law, “Regions, Networks, and Fluids: Anaemia and Social Topology,” Social Studies of Science 24 (1994), 641-71.

91 personal and lineage identities. The Zhou take on Shang ancestral ritual thus made its way across, and indeed helped form, the Zhou cultural sphere. 2

As the politics and demographics of the new state developed, however, and as external

circumstances restricted the available resource pool, the Zhou royal house made corresponding

changes in its strategy of ritual deployment. Some terms and modes of practice that offered

substantial benefit to practitioners of varied status continued, while others, the lion’s share, faded from the inscriptional record. This process culminated in a break between the ritual practices of the royal house and those of non-royal Zhou elites, as well as a change in the relationship between the performance of ancestral ritual, the casting of inscribed bronze vessels, and the power dynamic between local lineages and the royal house. Terms that came into vogue after this break would heavily influence later characterizations of Western Zhou ritual.

All of these processes are visible in the bronze inscriptions, through fine-grained analysis of the vocabulary of ritual practices and events used therein. The following pages conduct such an analysis, approaching the terminology of Western Zhou ancestral ritual with the inscriptions as main source, supplementing with texts of likely contemporary date when relevant, and drawing on oracle bones and later received texts only to show overall trends of use over time.

Based on close, chronologically situated analysis of a range of terms used to describe ritual actions and events, I will argue that the Western Zhou kings strove to introduce Shang-style ancestral ritual to the Zhou elite population in general; that those modes of Shang ancestral ritual that provided general utility in the new environment thrived while others waned; and that, towards the end of the Western Zhou period, a new vocabulary of ancestral ritual emerged that

2 In particular, a few major ritual events hosted at the beginning of the Western Zhou period and involving the performance of patrilineal ancestral ritual encouraged the perception of the king both as the prototypical performer of ancestral rites and as somehow qualitatively distinct from and thereby not replaceable by other performers. This perceived blend of inherited uniqueness and centrality to the ancestral-ritual complex achieved its ultimate expression in the characterization of the Zhou king as “the son of Heaven” ( tianzi 天子).

92 would gain in popularity over the course of the Eastern Zhou. These arguments will provide the foundation for a later explanation of the set of changes sometimes called the “Middle Western

Zhou Ritual Reform” or the “ritual revolution.” 3

Since its goal is to understand how Western Zhou elites of various statuses used rites to mediate controversies over group formation, identity, and membership, 4 this analysis focuses

whenever possible on the people involved in rites and their relationships to each other both

during and outside the context of the rite. Based on this, and given the disparity in content

between inscriptions describing royal performances of rituals and those with no explicit

connection to the royal house, it is divided between rites and ritual actions that appear in

inscriptions as having been performed by both kings and non-royal elites; those for which the

inscriptions record royal performances only; and those that, in the inscriptions, show no specific

connection to the royal house. 5

2.2: Shared rites

The Western Zhou bronze inscriptions attribute a number of ritual actions to both kings and non-royal aristocrats. Generally speaking, early Western Zhou inscriptions tend to record cases of these actions conducted by the Zhou kings as parts of major hospitality events, while later inscriptions focus more on the operation of ancestral ritual among non-royal elites and its connection with the creation of bronze vessels; however, there are important exceptions.

3 On this phenomenon, see Falkenhausen, “Late Western Zhou Taste,” Etudes Chinoises 18.1-2, 1999, 149-55; Rawson, Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes from the Arthur M. Sackler Collections , Washington, D.C.: The Arthur M. Sackler Foundation, Cambridge: The Arthur M. Sackler Museum, 1990, 93-110; Shaughnessy, Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Confucian Classics , Albany: SUNY press, 1997, 184-6. 4 Under the ANT model of “sociology of associations,” such controversies are the primary source of data on associations, since they tend to fade into the background once established. On this see Latour, Reassembling the Social, 27-42, esp. 30-1. 5 These divisions in the inscriptions do not always reflect perfectly the state of affairs in contemporary received texts; such disparities are a further source of information.

This section presents the terms denoting these rites in three very general thematic

groupings: rites associated with direct royal patronage of livestock offerings among elite lineages,

beginning early and continuing into the middle Western Zhou; rites which appear in the

inscriptions mainly during the early Western Zhou, whether as components of royal ritual events

or as personal practices of non-royal elites; and rites or ritual terms which appear throughout the

period and, apparently, became part of the shared rubric of Western Zhou elite ritual.

There is substantial overlap between these categories. In particular, rites from the first ( di )

and the second ( rong ) combined with rites from the first ( hui, zheng ) as part of an overall project

of major ritual events hosted by the Zhou kings during the early Western Zhou. The fluidity of

the categories, and the varying definitions, acceptance, and longevity of particular practices that

it reflects, shows that Zhou elite group identity, like the Zhou state itself, was in a constant state

of formation and reformation in response to both internal stresses (demographic changes, for

example) and external stimuli (military setbacks, etc.). 6

2.2.1: Livestock rites and royal patronage

2.2.1.1: Di/chi 禘/啻

6 From the standpoint of actor-network theory, the variable degree of success of different ritual techniques at different times is to be expected as part of the ongoing process of performing group identity. Regularity, as Latour argues, would be the exceptional case; see Reassembling the Social , 34. The sociological concept of “fluidity” is particularly useful for conceiving of the problem of both individual rites and ritual in general as “social objects.” The distinctions between particular “rites” and the feasting, rewards, and other activities that often – but not always – accompanied them break down on closer examination; in Law’s and Mol’s terms, rites form “fluid spaces” with other social phenomena. See Mol and Law, 659-60. Beard observes this with respect to the Roman triumph; see Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph , Cambridge, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007, 263-6. For an example of a construct which, in Mol’s and Law’s terms, “transforms itself from one arrangement into another without discontinuity” (Mol and Law, 664), see the discussion of royal vs. non-royal occurrences of hui -entreaty in section 2.3 of this chapter.

In the conceptualization of elite kinship seen in the Western Zhou sources, the royal house was a model patriline that other elite households could strive to emulate; 7 at the same time,

it was qualitatively different from other powerful households, despite its connections to them

through both real, remembered blood ties and the categorical model of the Ji 姬 surname. 8

Hence the Zhou kings were designated the “Sons of Heaven” ( tianzi ), but at the same time

continued to make offerings to their patrilineal ancestors, thereby setting the example for the

implementation of these rites among the rest of Zhou society. A specific ritual action indicated

in the bronze inscriptions by a character written as chi 啻 – that is, with the base character di 帝 over a mouth radical or other square object 口 – exemplifies this phenomenon. 9

2.2.1.1.1: Royal performances of di/chi

The Western Zhou bronze inscriptions record four specific instances of the ritual action called di/chi 啻. The earliest such case, that appearing in the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839)

inscription, formed part of an elaborate, multi-day ritual event associated with major military

accomplishments. In the wake of a great military victory, the vessel commissioner Yu attended

the king – probably King Kang – at the Zhou Temple ( Zhou miao 周廟) in the company of many of the most powerful individuals in the Zhou state.10 As part of the process of recognition of his accomplishments, Yu was present for a di/chi 啻 offering that the king performed, targeting the

7 On the phenomenon of xing , “modeling oneself after,” as a factor distinguishing Western Zhou ancestral ritual from other ancestral traditions, see chapter 1. 8 On the question of the role of surnames in the Western Zhou period, see Sena, “Reproducing Society: Lineage and Kinship in Western Zhou China,” 7-9, esp. notes 6 and 7. 9 Sarah Allan, “The Identity of Shang Di and the Origin of the Celestial Mandate,” Early China 31, 2007, 25; Liu Yuan, Shang Zhou jizuli yanjiu , Beijing: Shangwu, 2004, 66. 10 On the location of the Zhou Temple, see Bureaucracy , 160-3.

95 previous kings Wu and Cheng, as well as a figure called “the Zhou King” ( Zhouwang ); this latter presumably referred to King Wen as putative founder of the Zhou state. This offering involved a livestock sacrifice ( sheng 牲) and was associated with a number of libations ( guan 祼)

exchanged between the aristocratic participants and a crack-divination ( bu 卜), as well as an invocation ( zhu 祝) performed by the king himself. The king presented Yu with a number of military-themed gifts on this occasion. 11 This is the earliest instance of the ceremony known as di/chi 啻 recorded in the inscriptions. As we will see below, the king’s formal recognition of

Yu’s achievements in conjunction with the di/chi ceremony is of note.

Further occurrences of the di/chi rite appear in a series of vessels dating to the middle

Western Zhou period. The relevant inscriptions are brief but, as a group, offer an intriguing network of data on the circumstances of performance of the rite and its role in elite relations.

The inscription of the Xian gui 鮮簋 (10166), a bronze currently housed in the British Museum and assigned by JC to the middle Western Zhou, echoes some of the details described in the Xiao

Yu ding inscription, suggesting that they may have constituted habits of practice of the rite in

question: 12

隹（唯）王卅又四祀唯五月既朢戊午，王才（在）京，啻（禘）于 （昭）王，鮮  （蔑），（祼）王 （璋）、（祼）玉三品、貝廿朋，對王休，用乍（作）子孫其永寶。 It was the king’s 34 th offering cycle, the fifth month, the jiwang moon phase, the wuwu day. The king was at the Pang Capital; he performed the di -rite to King Zhao. Xian received the recounting of merits ( mieli ) and offered libation. The king awarded [him] three jade items for guan -libation and 20 strings of cowries. 13 Responding to the king’s

11 See the Xiao Yu ding inscription (JC 2839, MWX 63). 12 JC 10166. Vessels whose inscriptions, like that of the Xian gui, refer to specific departed kings are typically considered to date to the reign of the following king, which would make the Xian gui a King Mu bronze; see Shaughnessy, Sources, 108. 13 For this reading of the sentence, see Sun Qingwei, “Zhou dai guanli de xin zhengju,” Zhongyuan wenwu 2005.1, 72; Li Xueqin and Ai Lan, “Xian gui de chubu yanjiu,” Zhongguo wenwu bao 1990, cited in Yang Zhou, “Jinwen

beneficence, he therewith makes [a vessel]; may [his] sons and grandsons eternally treasure [it].

As did the Xiao Yu ding inscription, the Xian gui records an occasion wherein the king formally

acknowledged the accomplishments of a subordinate elite – here, through the familiar mieli , or

“recounting of merits,” a term covered in detail later in the chapter – at an event where he also

performed a di/chi offering dedicated to a prior king or kings. Of note here is the important role played by liquor and liquor vessels in the process; not only did the honoree Xian take part in guan-libations, but the king also awarded him jade items for use in conducting them. This is in

accord with the Xiao Yu ding inscription narrative, which, though incomplete, describes even

more elaborate exchanges of libations between honoree, king, and attendees.

The Lie ding 剌鼎 (2776), another probable King Mu vessel, 14 suggests that its dedicatee played an active role in the king’s di/chi rite:

唯五月王才（在）衣，辰才（在）丁卯，王啻（禘），用牡于大室，啻（禘）卲（昭）王，剌（御），王易（賜）剌貝卅朋，天子邁（萬）年，剌對揚王休，用乍（作）黃公 彝， （其）孫孫子子永寶用。 It was the fifth month; the king was at Yi. On the morning of the day dingmao , the king conducted the di -rite. He employed a sacrifice in the Great Hall and performed the di -rite for King Zhao; Lie attended [on the king]. The king presented Lie with thirty strings of cowries. Ten thousand years to the Son of Heaven! Lie praises the king’s beneficence in response, thereby making a precious jiang -vessel for Huanggong. May [his] grandsons’ grandsons and sons’ sons long treasure and use [it].

In fact, the Lie ding inscription is the only example in which the di/chi rite is not said to coincide with a ceremonial acknowledgement of a subordinate’s merit. It is of course possible that no such acknowledgement occurred in this case. However, the term yu 御, rendered here as “to

‘pin’ yu ‘guan yu san pin’ shu xi,” Shanxi shida xuebao 2007.5, p. 131. 14 Scholars are generally in agreement that the La ding dates to the reign of King Mu; see Shirakawa 97, 256; Shaughnessy, Sources , 110.

97 attend on,” indicates that Lie was not present as a passive guest, but played a supporting role in the performance of the rite in question.15 This suggests that the gift Lie received in the

inscription was meant to reward his participation in the rite itself rather than as an

acknowledgement of some prior meritorious activity. If an acknowledgement of merit did take

place, it is possible that Lie omitted it as irrelevant to his case. Alternatively, the conferral of

thirty cowries may simply have been meant as a hospitality gift for Lie, who, judging from his

dedication of the vessel to “Duke Huang” ( Huanggong 黄公), was probably of some

consequence in the hierarchy of the Western Zhou state. It is of note that, like the Xiao Yu ding

inscription, the Lie ding account states that the king employed a livestock sacrifice ( sheng 牲) for

the di/chi rite.

2.2.1.1.2: Non-royal performances of di/chi

The above inscriptions make up all cases in the corpus in which the king is said to have performed a di/chi rite. Non-royal elites carried out the rite as well, however. The inscription of the Fan you 繁卣 (5430), dated by JC to the middle Western Zhou, provides an example: 16

隹（唯）九月初吉癸丑，公祀，旬又一日辛亥，公啻（禘）辛公祀，卒事亡， 17 公（蔑）繁，易（賜）宗彝一 （肆）、車、馬兩。繁拜手首，對揚公休，用乍（作）文考辛公寶 彝，其邁（萬）年寶。〔或〕。 It was the ninth month, the chuji moon phase, the guichou day. The Duke performed rong -offerings. Eleven days later, on the xinhai day, 18 the Duke performed the di/chi

15 For this reading of the character, see Shirakawa, 258-9. 16 MWX dates the Fan you to King Mu’s reign; see MWX 119, 125. 17 The transcription of this character follows MWX , 125 n. 3. MWX and the AS database agree on the basic sense. 18 In fact, the day xinhai is two days earlier in the sixty-day cycle. MWX explains this disparity with the suggestion that the eleven days in question referred to the separation of the rites in question not from the first date given, but from the performance of rites dedicated to a previous ancestor in a system of ancestors; see MWX , 125, n. 2. An error in the first branch of one of the two dates might also explain the problem; Liu Yu suggests such a solution in “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli,” Kaogu xuebao 1989.4, 500.

offering and the rong offering to Duke Xin. The business was completed without harm. The Duke recounted Fan’s merits, giving [him] a vessel for the ancestral hall, 19 a chariot, and two horses. Fan bows and strikes his head, praising the Duke’s beneficence in response, therewith making a precious zun -vessel for Duke Xin. May [he] treasure [it] for ten thousand years. [Clan mark.]

Here again, the vessel commissioner, Fan, receives the mieli acknowledgement ceremony in conjunction with the performance of a di/chi rite. In this case, however, the rite was performed not by the king, but by a person known by the title gong , “Duke.” Given that the rite in question targeted a figure known as “Duke Xin” ( Xingong 辛公) and that Fan dedicated his vessel to the same figure, it is likely that Fan was a blood relative of the Duke, perhaps a younger brother or a member of a branch lineage connected with the main lineage through Duke Xin. The Duke’s awarding of an ancestral vessel ( zongyi 宗彝) to Fan is notable as an example of the direct promulgation of ancestral ritual; the Duke rewards Fan for playing the appropriate role in the performance of the former’s ancestral cult, while on the same occasion providing him with the tools necessary to carry out his own cult activities. 20 Here, then, is a case of the active

structuring of the lineage hierarchy through the medium of participation in ritual and its

concomitant rewards.

Based on the later ritual texts, one might expect that the Duke’s performance of the di/chi

rite as described in the Fan you inscription was a co-opting of the royal prerogative. 21 The inscription of the Da gui 大簋 (4165), however, shows that the royal house in fact intended for

the rite to be performed by non-royal elites:

19 Or perhaps a set of vessels. Wu Zheng has recently argued that the bronze inscriptions contain no measure words for individual items; see Wu Zheng, “Yin Zhou Hanyu mingliangci bianxi,” Yindu xuekan 2009.3, 111-5. 20 The king’s awarding of guan -items to Xian, mentioned above with respect to the Xian gui , had similar implications. 21 The Liji formulation of the rite di 禘 emphasizes its exclusivity to the royal house; for the classic formulation of this stance, see Liji , “Da zhuan,” in Shisanjing zhushu , 1506.

唯六月初吉丁巳，王才（在）奠22 （鄭），（蔑）大，易（賜）芻（騂） （犅），曰：用啻于乃考。大拜首，對揚王休，用乍（作）（朕）皇考大中（仲）  。 It was the sixth month, the chuji moon phase, the dingsi day; the King was at Zheng and recounted Da’s merits, awarding him red, grain-fed livestock, saying, “Use this in di/chi - offering to your deceased father.” Da bowed and struck his head, praising the king’s beneficence in response, therewith making a revered gui -tureen for my august deceased father Da Zhong. 23

In this case, the king is in Zheng, outside the normal sphere of his ritual activities; he is probably

on the home ground of the Da lineage. 24 He conducts the recounting of merits for Da and

arranges that he be awarded cattle raised on fodder, stipulating that it/they be used as sacrificial

offerings in a di/chi rite to Da’s immediate patrilineal ancestors. 25 Again the official conferral of recognition by the royal house is associated with the di/chi rite. Although the king himself does not perform a di -rite in this case, he does take pains to associate the acknowledgement of Da’s merits with the di/chi rite, and the ancestral-ritual institution in general, by ensuring that Da is appropriately equipped to carry on the rite on his own time.

As did the royal sponsorship of zong seen in the previous chapter, the royal patronage of the di/ chi rite seen here reinforced an association of the patrilineal ancestral cult with temporal status and prestige as derived from connections with the Zhou royal house. The fact of Da’s ability to conduct the di/chi rite with auspicious offerings was thanks to the largesse he received from the king on the occasion of his official acknowledgement of merits. Da’s actual performance of the rite, his provision of offerings for his ancestors within the context of his own

22 I follow MWX , 270, in reading the base character here as dian 奠 (representing zheng 鄭). 23 There is some disagreement on the date of this bronze. Shirakawa suggests that it dates to the eras of Kings Mu and Gong,; see Shirakawa 118, 491-4. MWX assigns it to King Yi; see MWX 393, 269-70. Duandai dates it to after King Gong; see Duandai 121, 168-9. I follow Shirakawa’s dating. 24 On Zheng, see Lu Liancheng, “Zhou du yu Zheng kao,” in Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo, Guwenzi lunji (Kaogu yu wenwu congkan no. 2; Xi’an: 1983), 8–11. 25 The king’s ability to confer this award is of some note. Did the royal house maintain herds at Zheng? Did the king bring livestock with him for the occasion? Or was the king appropriating livestock from locals and redistributing it to Da? Further research is necessary.

100

ancestral cult, would then recall his relationship with the royal house and, specifically, his

acknowledgement of merits. Through their patronage, the Zhou kings thus tethered and even

subordinated the internal relationships of Da’s lineage to the external relationships of its

members – i.e ., Da’s standing with the Zhou royal house. 26 The fact that the Zhou kings had themselves performed the di/chi rite that Da was to perform would have reinforced this connection, as would Da’s commissioning of an inscribed bronze commemorating his receipt of the livestock to be used in the offering.

The normative force of these connections would, of course, have been contingent on Da’s actual performing of the rite as requested by the king. It is possible that Da simply accepted the king’s gift with good grace and went about his business without internalizing the model of ritual behavior in which the royal house sought his participation. Still, the example of the Fan you indicates that at least some non-royal Zhou aristocrats considered the di/chi rite relevant enough to carry it out in a context independent of the king’s immediate supervision; and Da’s recording of the sequence on an inscribed bronze suggests that he at least introduced the idea of royally sponsored di/chi into the context of his lineage cult.

The above examples comprise all direct references to di/chi 啻 as a rite in the Western

Zhou inscriptions, but potentially not all such cases in early Western Zhou materials.

2.2.1.1.3: Di 帝, di 禘, chi 啻, and the Bamboo Annals

26 It is worth noting that Da referred to his father with the term zhong 仲, indicating either that he was at one point second in line to succeed as lineage head or that his and therefore Da’s lineage was a branch; on this see Sena, “Reproducing Society,” 123-4. The inscription’s referral to Da by that name (that is, by the name of his lineage) suggests to me that the former possibility was more likely. This then raises questions about Da’s relative seniority within the hierarchy of his lineage. Was Da referred to by that name because he was the current lineage head? If not, how did his status as son of a second sibling affect his standing within the lineage, and how did the king’s obvious and direct patronage of Da react with that dynamic? This topic merits further research, pending the discovery of more relevant materials.

101

Analyses of the rite written as chi 啻 in the Western Zhou inscriptions sometimes approach it as an intermediary stage between the Shang term di 帝, used both to refer to the

greatest known natural and/or ancestral patron spirit and to indicate a rite performed for a variety

of ancestor spirits and natural phenomena; 27 and the term di 禘, common in later texts but

especially so in the Liji , which characterizes it both as a dedicated royal practice and as one of

the set seasonal rites of the Zhou royal house. 28 As portrayed in the inscriptions, however, the

Western Zhou rite indicated by this character shared little with either the Shang di 帝 rite that preceded it or the di 禘 rites described in the Eastern Zhou sources. 29

There is, however, one bit of evidence suggesting continuity between the terms in question. The “New Text” section of the Zhushu jinian contains two separate references to the di

禘 rite, employing the character di 禘. One, dated to King Cheng’s reign, notes the performance of a di -rite at the Temple of the Duke of Zhou by representatives of the state of Lu 魯 after a successful campaign in cooperation with the king. 30 The other, dated to King Kang’s reign,

27 For a comparative summary of the analysis of the character di in the oracle bones, including bibliographic references to the major interpretations, see Sarah Allan, “The Identity of Shang Di and the Origin of the Celestial Mandate,” 1-46. See also JGWZGL 1132, 1082-6. In fact, both Allan and Liu Yuan note that the Shang may have observed an orthographic distinction between Di the spirit and di the rite; see Liu Yuan, Jizuli, 66; Allan, “Shang Di,” 21-2, 24-6. 28 See Liji, “Da zhuan,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1506; “Wang zhi,” 1335-7; “Ji yi,” 1592. For an example of the approach mentioned, see Liu Lamei, “Qianxi Yin dai wanqi zhi Chunqiu shiqi “diji” de bianhua,” Heilongjiang shizhi 2009.19, 119, 125. JWGL 7, 120, summarizes arguments from a number of scholars identifying chi 啻 with di 帝 and/or di 禘, including Fang Junyi, Xu Zhongshu, and Ding Shan. 29 Allan, “Shang Di,” 25-6; Liu Yuan, Jizuli, 70-1 75-6. Unlike the Shang rite, which targeted both ancestral spirits and natural entities, the Western Zhou chi 啻 rite, like most rites of the period, targeted only recent patrilineal ancestors; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 496-8, 515. Nor did the Western Zhou rite have a discernible seasonal association, unless one accepts that the small sample set available establishes a biseasonal schedule for the chi 啻 rite; for that viewpoint, see Dong Lianchi, “Yin Zhou diji tanzhen,” Renwen zazhi 1994.5, 75-8, which assigns the rite to summer and autumn. 30 Bamboo Annals, King Cheng, 13th year. See Legge, The Shoo King , vol. 1, Prolegomena, 146; future references will indicate page numbers in this edition. Lu was founded by the Duke of Zhou’s descendants; see Shaughnessy, “The Duke of Zhou’s Retirement in the East and the Beginnings of the Minister-Monarch Debate in Chinese

102

targeted “the former kings” ( xian wang 先王) and is attributed to that king himself. 31 As public ancestral rites devoted to patrilineal ancestors, performed by both the Zhou king and the representatives of a powerful branch lineage, and recorded as major events, these are essentially compatible with the image of chi 啻 presented in the bronze inscriptions.

2.2.1.1.4: Summary

The ritual practice known as di/chi 啻 was performed during the early Western Zhou

(King Kang) and the middle Western Zhou periods, during which time its occurrences left direct records in the corpus of inscribed bronzes; based on the Zhushu jinian records, it may have been performed under King Cheng as well. In particular, it saw its heyday during the reign of King

Mu, to which three of the inscriptions mentioning it probably date. The Zhou kings performed it occasionally as part of major ceremonial events. Other powerful Zhou elites, including the

“Duke” ( gong ) of the Fan you inscription and, probably, Da of the Da gui inscription, performed it as well, with the blessing of the Zhou royal house. 32

Di/chi involved, or at least admitted, a livestock sacrifice (Lie ding , Xiao Yu ding , Da gui ).

It was frequently performed in conjunction with guan -libations (Xiao Yu ding , Xian gui ) and

was not discernibly tied to a particular place or time; the Zhou kings performed it in multiple

Political Philosophy,” Early China 18 (1993), 48-50; Li Feng, Bureaucracy, 58. The Temple of the Duke of Zhou (Zhougong miao 周公廟) was probably in the area still known by that name today, where substantial Western Zhou remains have been discovered; on the archaeological work in this area, see Xu Tianjin, “Zhougongmiao yizhi de kaogu suohuo yu suosi,” Wenwu 2006.8, 55-62. Thus, after the campaign was complete, the forces of Lu traveled to and made offerings at a temple in the heartland, devoted to their recently deceased lineage founder, before traveling back to their homeland in the eastern reaches of north China. 31 Bamboo Annals , King Kang, 3 rd year, 147. Note that the Zhushu jinian record of King Kang’s di -rite assigns it to the third year of his reign, definitively precluding the possibility that it refers to the same event recorded in the Xiao Yu ding inscription. 32 As mentioned above, the “New Text” Bamboo Annals offer one more example: that of representatives of Lu 魯 making offerings to the Duke of Zhou, the progenitor of the state’s ducal line.

103

locations (the Zhou Temple [Xiao Yu ding ], Yi [Lie ding ], Pangjing [Xian gui ]) and at different times. It was, however, typically accompanied by an official recounting of a subordinate’s merit

(usually indicated by the term mieli 蔑歷, except in the Xiao Yu ding case). As such, it was an

opportunity for the instantiation of hierarchical bonds between superior and subordinate in the

context of patrilineal ancestral ritual. The conferral of official recognition and rewards in

conjunction with a superior’s ancestral cult activities conditioned the subordinate to conceive of

his success in terms of the favor of the superior’s ancestors and the well-being of his ancestral

line. Rewarding elites who assisted with the ritual event, as recorded in the Lie ding inscription, extended the patronage opportunities beyond the individual relationship celebrated in the recounting of merit. This in turn would have encouraged elites in a sense of cooperative well- being, as the ancestral rituals associated with the honoring and rewarding of one created opportunities for others to distinguish themselves and receive rewards. 33 Di/chi events thus encouraged elites to develop interdependent assignations of status within the rubric of Zhou elite interaction; to use Callon’s terms, they strove to establish interessement, to engage different elites in the problematization that was the formation of Zhou elite identity. 34

The Zhou kings did not monopolize di/chi . They performed it at various locations, including

on the territory of at least one other lineage; and judging from the Da gui inscription, at least one

Zhou king – probably King Mu – materially promoted its performance by elites outside the royal

lineage. Royal patronage of the di/chi rite would have encouraged local elite lineages such as

Da’s to manage internal relationships in terms of ancestral ritual, as the Duke did in the events

recorded by the Fan you inscription. Knowledge of the source of that patronage, conveyed in

33 This is not to say that such ritual events were idyllically cooperative. Recounting the merits of one party requires passing over those of many others; and it is entirely conceivable that, for every elite like La who assisted the king in an important ritual event, several more failed to win that privilege. 34 See Michel Callon, “Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay,” 206-11.

104

particular by the production of inscribed bronzes, generated prestige for members of those

lineages; this in turn would have allowed the royal house to influence the ongoing performance

of local group identities. 35

2.2.1.2: Lao 牢/Da lao 大牢

As implied by its character form, the term lao 牢 is generally understood in both the

Shang oracle bones and the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions to indicate pen-raised livestock animals, especially those intended as sacrificial offerings, and as a verb indicating the offering of those animals. 36 There can be no doubt that lao , in its sense as an animal sacrifice, made its way

into the Zhou cultural milieu. It appears unambiguously in non-royal bronze inscriptions from

the middle Western Zhou period, especially in the phrase da lao 大牢, and it is ubiquitous in later received texts. 37 The role of lao in early Western Zhou ritual is unclear, however, as is the

question of whether the Zhou kings themselves ever approached lao as performers rather than patrons.

2.2.1.2.1: Royal instances of lao in the Western Zhou inscriptions (or the lack thereof)

Only two inscriptions offer any evidence that the Zhou kings might, like the Shang kings before them, have performed a rite known by the name lao. One, the Zi zun 子尊 (6000), may

be of Shang rather than Western Zhou date; in its inscription, the term effectively functions as a

35 On the performative definition of group identity, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , p. 34. 36 For a summary of prevailing opinions on the term, see JGWZGL 1548, 1504-17; JWGL 100, 527-8. The Shuowen has it simply as “an enclosure for the care of cattle and horses”; see Duan Yucai, Shuowen jiezi zhu , Shanghai: Shanghai Guji, 1981, 52. 37 Debate has long taken place on the details of da lao vs. shao lao ; for a brief summary of this problem, see Yuan Jing, “Dongwu kaoguxue yanjiu de xin faxian yu xin jinzhan,” Kaogu 2004.7, 57.

105

measure word – albeit measuring animals to be used as sacrificial victims in a specified rite. 38

In the second, that of the Haozi you 貉子卣 (5409), the term lao probably functions as a

mundane verb meaning “to pen up [game],” as on a hunt. 39 I am thus reluctant even to suggest that any Zhou kings employed a sacrifice called by that name. Non-royal elites certainly did, however, and were occasionally supported in their efforts by higher-ranking or even royal patrons, as we shall shortly see.

2.2.1.2.2: Non-royal instances of lao in Western Zhou inscriptions

Three more instances of the term lao occur among the Academia Sinica inscriptions; the

database dates one of them to the early and two to the middle Western Zhou. 40 All three employ

the term not singly, but as part of the compound phrase da lao 大牢, seen commonly in both the

Shang oracle bones and the later received texts. 41 The early Western Zhou case and one of the middle cases resemble the Zi zun inscription in that they use the term to refer to a gift received with the intent that it be used as a sacrificial offering. To make the case that the term da lao 大

牢 could itself describe an offering, it is therefore advantageous to present the remaining middle

Western Zhou case first:

38 The AS database dates the Zi zun to the late Shang or early Western Zhou. Liu Yu treats the zun as an early Western Zhou vessel in his treatment of the term  , in which he takes the events of the inscription as a show of subservience by Zi, an elite of Shang heritage, to the Zhou king; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong ,” 509. Chen Xianfang similarly suggests that Zi was a Shang elite who had submitted to the Zhou; however, Chen views the inscription as evidence that remnant Shang elites retained some Shang cultural characteristics after the conquest. See Chen Xianfang, “Fu gui zun yu Zi zun,” Wenwu 1986.1, 44-5. 39 See Duandai , 123. 40 See the Lübo gui 呂伯簋 (3979), Rong Zhong ding (NA1567), and Ren ding (NA1554) inscriptions. 41 For examples of da lao in the Shang oracle bones, see H21548, H28244, H29561, etc.; for da lao in later received texts, see for example Zhouli , “Qiu guan si kou,” “Zhang ke,” in Shisanjing zhushu , Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1980, 900-2; Yili , “Pin li,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1048; Liji , “Wang zhi,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1337; etc.

106

（呂）白（伯）乍（作）（厥）宮室寶彝，大牢，其萬年祀（厥）祖考。 The Elder of Lü makes a precious, revered gui -tureen for the hall of his palace and performs a great lao -offering. May he make offerings to his grandfat hers and deceased father for ten thousand years. (Lübo gui 呂伯簋 [3979])

The vessel that bears this inscription, the Lübo gui , is no longer extant; it is known from its line drawing and inscription rubbing in Xiqing .42 Duandai dates it to the reign of King Kang, noting that a figure called Lübo appears also in the inscription of the Ban gui , which Chen dates to King

Cheng. 43 Judging from the apparent depth of the vessel, its facing -bird decorations, and its cover, however, JC is probably right in assigning i t to the middle Western Zhou period. 44 The syntax of the inscription leaves little room for doubt that the instance of the phrase da lao it contains was meant to indicate an ancestral offering. The phrase is grammatically independent of the preceding and following sentences, both of which follow common Western Zhou inscriptional formulae. It must contain a verb, for which lao is the obvious choice. Based on the context of the inscription, it is highly unlikely that the Elder of Lü was meant to be capturi ng or penning up anything. Lao , like the rest of the inscription, relates somehow to the ancestral cult for which the bronze was produced; given the uses of the phrase da lao in both earlier and later materials, it is reasonable to assume that it refers t o an offering here as well. 45

The remaining two vessels are both relatively recent additions to the corpus; the Rong

Zhong ding 榮仲鼎 (NA1567) is a recent acquisition of the Poly Museum, the Ren ding 任鼎

(NA1554) of the Chinese National Museum. 46 Li Xueqin co mpares the former vessel to the

42 Xiqing 27.11. 43 Duandai 88, 128; 12, 24-7. 44 Compare, for example, the Chang Xin gui (3581-2), which Shaughnessy offers as exemplar of his “Style II gui ”; see Shaanxi sheng wenwu guanli weiyuanhui, “Chang’an Puducun Xi Zhou mu de fajue,” Kaogu xuebao 1957.1, 75-85, esp. 79, plate 2; Shaughnessy, Sources , 129-30, fig. 22. Shaughnessy dates the Ban gui to the middle Western Zhou period as well; see Sources , 107. 45 See note 41. 46 On the Rong Zhong ding, see Li Xueqin, “Shilun xin faxian de Ban fan gding he Rong Zhong fangding,” Wenwu

107

Zhong fangding (2751) , an early Western Zhou bronze illustrated in Bogutu , and to the Xian ding (NA0703); the AS database editors assign the former to the early and the latter to the middle Western Zhou. 47 Its inscription records an honorary gift that a party called Zi 子

conferred on Rong Zhong, in the wake of the king’s construction for Rong Zhong of a structure

that AS renders as gong 宮, “palace, office,” and Li identifies as xu 序, “school.” 48 The fact that

Rong Zhong issues invitations 49 to the sons of the Elder of Rui (Ruibo 芮伯) and the Marquis of

Hu ( Huhou 胡侯) lends Li’s theory some support, as does the intriguing fact that Zi rewarded

Rong Zhong after the king constructed a building on his behalf.

This Zi may have been the son or sons of the Elder and the Marquis; a royal scion; or perhaps even a powerful former Shang noble, as Liu Yu proposed for the Zi of the Zi zun inscription. What brings the event to our attention here is the fact that Zi’s gifts to Rong Zhong included sheng da lao 牲大牢, “a great lao for sacrifice.” It is notable that the inscription relates this gift to 1) the king’s construction project and 2) Rong Zhong’s invitation to two powerful

Zhou leaders. Assuming a relationship between Zi and the king, the inscription suggests that, in its commissioner’s view, the Zhou royal house’s setting up of physical infrastructure on behalf of a local elite was directly associated with its patronage of his ancestral cult activities. Thanks to this act of patronage, Rong Zhong in turn was able to issue an invitation to the Elder of Rui and the Marquis of Hu (or to their sons), drawing on the prestige and material resources awarded him by Zi to support hospitality activities and forge bonds with other powerful Zhou affiliates. 50 Zi

2005.9, 59-69, and Feng Shi, “Ban fangding, Rong Zhong fangding ji xiangguan wenti,” Kaogu 2006.8, 67-73; on the Ren ding , see Wang Guanying, “Ren ding mingwen kaoshi,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2004.2, 20-5. 47 See Li Xueqin, “Shilun,” 62; AS database. 48 AS database; Li Xueqin, “Shilun,” 62-3. 49 Reading su 速 in the inscription as “to summon, to invite,” as Li does; see Li Xueqin, “Shilun,” 64. 50 Having examined the rubbing, I suspect that the repetition mark that both JC (AS database) and Li Xueqin read after the character zi 子 at the end of the seventh line may be a flaw in the bronze or the rubbing. If that is the

108

then rewarded Rong Zhong yet again, providing him with the metal to support the casting of a

bronze to commemorate the event. The da lao , the offering animals, in question were the

medium (or mediator, to use Latour’s term) that allowed Rong to leverage the infrastructure built

for him by the king and the prestige of royal recognition to make these horizontal, inter-lineage

connections, at once winning status for himself and strengthening the perceived intra-lineage

connections around which the Zhou state was organized.

If the role of Zi in the Rong Zhong ding inscription raises questions about the connection

of the royal house to the prestation activities described therein, the Ren ding inscription presents

no such ambiguities. 51 It records Ren’s receipt of an official recounting of merits from a

representative of the king, Meng Lianfu, after a series of unusual circumstances. 52 The recounting was accompanied by gifts, which again included a da lao meant for the express

purpose of sacrifice (the phrase used is ting sheng tai lao 脡牲太牢, “a great lao for meat-

sacrifice”). 53 Beyond the fact of the royal patronage of the ancestral cult through the distribution of sacrificial victims, two additional commonalities between the two inscriptions are of note.

One is that the gifts in question were in both cases conveyed through an intermediary rather than by the king himself; we might attribute this to the convenience of delegating the management of

case, then Rong Zhong issued an invitation to the Elder and the Marquis themselves rather than their sons, after which Zi presented him with a gift of metal. See Li Xueqin, “Shilun,” 64, for the rubbing image. 51 The dating of the Ren ding to the middle Western Zhou period is unproblematic as well; see Wang Guanying, 20. 52 Wang Guanying reads the sequence as follows: the king was presented with a beast of some sort, probably either a female ape or an elephant; a ding -cauldron was broken, possibly by the wild beast itself; Ren then purchased another cauldron (see Wang Guanying, 22). Wang rightly notes that the idea that ritual vessels could be bought and sold is controversial; on the question of inalienable goods in the Western Zhou context, see Constance A. Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” BSOAS 60.2 (1997), 253-94. He suggests the alternate reading mi 鼏, taking it to mean that the cauldron in question was covered or sealed, but is dissatisfied with that reading’s failure to account for the problem of the broken cauldron. I would like to suggest that ding xi 鼎衋 and mi 鼏 could be read as a single sentence, with mi carrying its Shuowen meaning of “to put a wooden pole through a cauldron’s ears and carry it” (which meaning Wang himself points out; see p. 23). That sentence would then mean something like “a ding -cauldron broke its carrying-pole.” 53 Both JC and Wang use the character tai 太 in their transcriptions, in analogy with the tai lao mentioned in later texts such as the Gongyang zhuan ; see Wang Guanying, 23. There was no difference between tai 太 and da 大 in the early script.

109

animals to specialists, or to someone whose own herds were closer to the site of the gift; but the

inscription of the Da gui , wherein the king, at Zheng, personally conveys a reward of cattle for use in the di -offering, offers a counter-example. The other is that both Rong Zhong and Ren dedicated their vessels using tiangan funerary names, a potential sign of Shang heritage; this is especially notable given the role played by Zi in the events of the former inscription.

2.2.1.2.3: Summary

In the Shang inscriptions, the term lao appears frequently to designate offerings of varying numbers of penned livestock animals. It is occasionally qualified as “greater” ( da 大) or

“lesser” ( xiao 小); the former term, at least, was apparently of variable number and could

potentially indicate a single animal. In the Western Zhou materials, on the other hand, there is

no indication that the simple term lao could refer to the offering of an animal, the two extant

early examples notwithstanding. The phrase da lao , on the other hand, refers to an offering at

least once, in the inscription of the Lü Bo gui , as well as describing royal gifts of livestock in at

least two other inscriptions.

No extant material, inscriptional or otherwise, confirms the performance of an offering

called lao by a Western Zhou king; only the Lü Bo gui inscription records the actual

performance of the rite by a Zhou lineage head. The remaining relevant cases describe gifts of

livestock meant to support the ancestral cult activities of other elites. The problematic Zi zun

case, if we accept it as a Western Zhou vessel, describes the gift of livestock victims by an elite

of potential Shang royal extraction to the king, for which he was well rewarded with a zan-jade –

an important piece in the context of Western Zhou elite ornamentation – and a large volume of

110

cowries; through his support of royal cult activities, he was able to convert his material wealth

into a form that denoted status within the Western Zhou sphere of elite interaction. 54 The Rong

Zhong ding and Ren ding inscriptions, in contrast, record royal patronage of ancestral offerings by lesser elites. In the former inscription, the king issues Rong Zhong gifts, including a da lao for use in ancestral offerings, after building him a structure, and Rong Zhong subsequently issues invitations to other ranking elites; here Zi’s gift helps integrate Rong Zhong into an interaction network composed of ranking Zhou elites while tying him directly to the king through royal patronage of his ancestral cult. The Ren ding inscription records a similar situation, although

Ren seems already to have rendered the king special service, judging from both the recounting of merits ( mieli 蔑歷) he received and the unusual events described in the early part of the inscription. Both of these inscriptions bear clan marks and dedications employing tiangan funerary names, raising the possibility that lao or da lao , as of the middle Western Zhou, was seen as relating to Shang heritage; however, the Lü Bo gui inscription contains neither.

There is some ambiguity, then, as to whether the Zhou kings ever performed lao as it was understood under the Shang. The Zhou kings did, however, recognize the utility of sacrificial livestock victims as a vehicle of patronage, allowing them to exert influence in the context of the ancestral cults of local elite lineages. Provisioning ancestral offerings allowed the royal house, as Latour might put it, to perpetuate the short-lived bonds of face-to-face interaction in a more durable physical form; 55 the built-in redistribution mechanism of feasting ensured that the meat

into which the kings infused those bonds would reach throughout patronized lineages and

54 On the exchange of cowries during the Western Zhou period, see Li Yung-ti, “On the Function of Cowries in Shang and Western Zhou China,” JEAA 5 (2006), 1-26; Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” 260-5. We cannot know at present to what degree this exchange was symmetrical, and by extension, what degree of coercion was involved; though my sense is that a hundred strings of cowries was a very large volume indeed. Further work on the relative values of exchange items in the Western Zhou inscriptions is in order. 55 See Latour, 64-8, 70-2.

111

potentially, as in the Rong Zhong ding case, horizontally to other powerful Zhou elites. Lao , or

rather da lao , was a medium for that process. Its disappearance from the inscriptional record

after the middle Western Zhou may have heralded a change in the policy of the royal house with

respect to ritual patronage, as the demographics of the Zhou state evolved; a rejection of the

practice by Zhou elites in favor of other modes of ritual offering; or a shift in the institution of

the production of inscribed bronzes, such that its purposes no longer intersected with the

performance of lao or da lao .

2.2.2: Rites appearing mainly during the early Western Zhou

2.2.2.1: Liao 燎 (burnt offering)

The JC inscriptions contains only one case of the character liao 燎, a term generally

understood to refer to ritual burning; plus a second case, written 尞, that is probably meant to indicate the same thing. Both of these refer to ceremonies held in the wake of successful military campaigns. 56 The former appears in the inscription of the Xiao Yu ding , mentioned above in the

section on the di rite. As part of the great victory celebration with which he is honored at the

Zhou Temple ( Zhoumiao 周廟), Yu makes a formal presentation of ears severed from his foes; this is accompanied by a liao rite. The poor condition of the surviving rubbings makes it difficult to determine precisely who conducted the liao in question:

57 王乎（呼）…令…（厥） （聝）入門，獻西旅，（以）…入燎周廟，盂… 入三門，即立中廷，北鄉（嚮），盂告。 The king called on…to order…their ears in through the gate and present [the results of] the western travels, therewith…to submit a liao -offering at the Zhou Temple.

56 This is often noted; see for example Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 508. 57 The transcription of this character follows MWX , 41.

112

Yu…entered the three gates and took up position in the center of the hall facing north; Yu reported.

Provided that the term ling 令, “to order, to command,” in the above excerpt is taken as a verb rather than as a personal name, however, it is unlikely that the king carried it out himself; my sense is that Yu, as leader of the successful military campaign, enjoyed the honor of performing a liao -rite in the king’s presence. Here, the liao -offering by itself was only one part of an

extended ritual event that brought together military officials, local potentates, and the king

himself for drinking, libations, a dress parade, reporting of a successful campaign, invocations,

divinations, offerings to the royal ancestors, and the granting of rewards.

The Yongbo X gui , on which the second occurrence appears, was reportedly discovered in the vicinity of Xi’an, Shaanxi, in the ancient Zhou heartland. 58 JC dates it to the early

Western Zhou; judging from the shape and décor of the vessel, however, it was probably produced no earlier than the reign of King Zhao, and potentially during that of King Mu. 59 The

inscription commemorates a reward received by Yongbo X – based on his name, the head of a

lineage known as Yong – after the king’s return from a campaign against two troublesome

populations:

隹（唯）王伐逨魚，伐 黑，至尞于宗周，易（賜）（庸）白（伯） 貝十朋，敢對揚王休，用乍（作）（朕）文考寶彝，其萬年子子孫孫其永寶用。 When the king attacked the Laiyu, came out, and attacked Zhuo?hei, [he] arrived and performed a liao -offering at Zongzhou. [The king] presented Yongbo X with ten strings of cowries. [Yongbo X] praises the king’s beneficence in response, thereby making a precious, revered vessel for my deceased father. May [his] descendants eternally treasure and use it for ten thousand years. Yongbo X gui 庸伯 簋 (4169)

58 See Sandai 8.50.4. Duandai dates it to the reign of Kings Zhao-Mu; see Duandai , 137. 59 With a bottom-heavy belly and a relatively flat surface dominated by facing bird decorations, the vessel fits well into Shaughnessy’s “ Gui type 2” classification, which he dates to the time of King Mu; see Sources, 127-32.

113

The king led the campaign mentioned in the inscription himself, and accordingly, it seems that

he also conducted the subsequent liao -offering personally as well. The inscription unfortunately does not provide enough information to determine Yongbo’s degree of involvement in the campaign and the liao rite that followed it. Yongbo may have participated in the campaign with

the king; he may have assisted the king in performing the liao rite; or he may simply have been

present. 60 Whatever the logic behind his reward, he evidently received it in conjunction with the king’s liao rite.

The practice of burning offerings is attested in the prehistoric Chinese context, particularly in what is now eastern coastal China; 61 Chen Mengjia connected this to the proposed

western migration of the Shang population. 62 Whether or not they brought it from the east, a rite

known as liao was common in the Shang oracle bone inscriptions, and judging from the form of

its character, it probably involved burnt offerings. 63 Initially, it was offered to a wide range of natural entities and ancestral spirits, but it underwent phases of greater or lesser popularity, and its range of targets eventually decreased. 64

The Zhou acquired the custom of liao from the Shang, and they probably performed it in the pre-conquest period, judging from its appearance in the Zhouyuan oracle bones. Their stipulated targets for the rite were limited to a figure which may or may not be the River ( He 河),

as well as the Marshals ( Shishi 師氏), real figures known from the Zhou bronze inscriptions.

60 Yongbo is mentioned in one other JC inscription, that of the Yongbo dinggai 庸伯鼎蓋 (NA1754), reputedly discovered in the Xi’an area as well; see Wang Changqi, “Xi’an shi wenwu zhongxin suocang Shang Zhou qingtongqi,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1990.5, 9.15. Unfortunately, this inscription merely states that Yongbo commissioned the vessel; it gives no further details. 61 See Li Jinshan, “Liaoji qiyuan yu dongbu yanhai diqu,” Zhongguo wenwu yanjiu 7 (Spring 1995), 41-2; for an argument on the feasibility of assessing cultural distribution based on the materials used in burnt offerings, see Xu Ke, “Gudai liaoji yongwu jiqi yiyi,” Sichuan daxue xuebao 2008.3, 138-43, esp. 42-3. 62 Chen Mengjia, “Guwenzi zhong,” 133. 63 See JGWZGL 1526, pp. 1466-70; Chen Mengjia, 107. Jiao Zhiqin finds 982 individual instances of the liao rite in HJ ; see Jiao Zhiqin, “Buci liaoji de yanbian,” Yindu xuekan 2001, 27. 64 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong ,” 508; Jiao Zhiqin, 29. On the range of entities targeted by liao in the Shang oracle bones, see Chen Mengjia, “Guwenzi zhong,” 113-33.

114

The involvement of the latter in the rite suggests that it was already developing an association

with military endeavor by the time the relevant Zhouyuan bones were produced. 65

Based on the records in the bronze inscriptions and in the “Shi fu” chapter of the

Yizhoushu , after the conquest of Shang, the Zhou royal house adopted the custom of liao specifically as a portion of celebrations of military victories. The Yongbo gui inscription mentions this phenomenon; the Xiao Yu ding inscription and, in all likelihood, the “Shi fu”

chapter of the Yizhoushu describe it in some detail. The victory ceremonies described in the “Shi

fu” example in particular are remarkably similar to the traditional model of the Roman triumph.

In particular, the king’s ceremonial arrival, apparently separate from his actual arrival, and the

parading of the remaining captives through the city adorned in finery, progressing to the temple,

have analogues in surviving accounts of the Roman process. 66

The Xiao Yu ding account describes a triumph in miniature, held under the watchful eye of the Zhou king. A fruitful contrast can be drawn between this account of liao and that connected with King Wu’s victorious return to the Zhou homeland, given in the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu .67 The “Shi fu” account shares most of the above elements, but the overall

sequence is quite different; the king and his adherents follow a formalized progression from

outside the city walls to the Zhou temple, with accompanying offerings at each stage. The

greater freedom of movement shown in the “Shi fu” account, I suspect, derives from the king’s

personal performance of the rite and, by extension, his personal enjoyment of the benefits thereof.

The triumphal ceremonies afforded to Yu took place in a fixed location and under the close

control of the king and royal representatives; the royal house seems to have been aware of the

danger inherent in allowing Yu to perform liao and to have taken pains to integrate that

65 Zhouyuan jiaguwen , 4, 26; Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 508. 66 See the discussion of Pompey’s triumphs in Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph , 7-41. 67 See Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu jiaopu zhuyi , Xi’an: Sanqin, 2006, 210-21, esp. 218.

115

performance into an overall framework dominated by the king’s hospitality activities –

manifested especially in the performance of guan -libations – and by royal ancestral offerings. 68

This framework helped maintain the royal house as an “obligatory passage point” for prestige and recognition in the wake of a major military victory, which, though auspicious, was a potentially destabilizing event from the standpoint of the budding Zhou hierarchy.

Liao may not have had a standard, orthodox format during the Western Zhou; it was tied to military victories, the political details of which would have varied from campaign to campaign, and its paucity of appearances in contemporary sources suggests that it was rare. As the centerpiece of the Xiao Yu ding inscription and the “Shi fu” account, liao was the anchor of multi-day ritual events that involved offerings dedicated specifically to ancestors. Whether the liao performed during the Western Zhou were themselves ancestral offerings, however – that is, whether the ears or other items being burnt were meant as an offering to ancestral spirits – is impossible to confirm, since no target is listed in any of the inscriptions. The performance of liao in the Zhou Temple ( Zhou miao 周廟) suggests that they may have been; but by itself, this is

insufficient evidence. Given, however, that liao was quite explicitly a devotional offering, both ancestral and non-ancestral, during the Shang period, and given that the understanding of liao as a burnt offering survived in received texts of much later date, I am inclined to believe that the devotional sense of liao remained intact during the early Western Zhou period, at least. On those grounds, I have included it in this chapter.

2.2.2.2: Rong 

68 Appendix 1 includes a discussion of the problematic topic of guan -libation.

116

In the bronze inscriptions, the term rong  is rare compared to such terms as di and

hui .69 It is central to the short inscriptions adorning the Wu yin zuo Fu Ding fangding 戊寅作父

丁方鼎 (2594) and the Fu Yi zun 父乙尊, two bronzes of likely Shang date. 70 In Western Zhou inscriptions, it appears only in conjunction with other rites; 71 in fact, two of the three Western

Zhou inscriptions containing it – those of the Shu Ze fangding , the Mai fangzun , and the Fan you ,

have already appeared in the above discussion. In the Shu Ze fangding inscription, as we have

seen, the Zhou king – probably King Cheng – conducts an ancestral entreaty ( hui ) at Chengzhou

in advance of an audience with his retainers, at which he rewards the vessel commissioner Shu

Ze. The rong in question is associated with that entreaty. The inscription of the Mai fangzun 麦

方尊 (6015) describes the visit of a regional lord, the Marquis of Xing, to the center of Zhou power at Zongzhou, where an early Western Zhou king – probably King Kang – installs him in the position by which the inscription names him. 72 After his appointment, the new Marquis of

Xing travels to the nearby city of Pangjing, where the king is conducting an event that involves

feasting, ancestral devotions, and the conferral of gifts. Here, rong is again part of the ritual

program, occurring in association with a feast, the day before the da li rite for which the Mai

fangzun inscription is best known.

69 As opposed to the Shang oracle bones, in which it is well represented. The CHANT OBI database lists 2059 occurrences of the character. See the Chinese Ancient Texts database maintained by the Chinese University of Hong Kong [ http://www.chant.org ], hereafter referred to as CHANT. 70 JC dates both of these bronzes to the late Shang. Syntactically, it is feasible that the rong in the Fu Yi zun inscription was the name of the person who commissioned the bronze, although I know of no other case in which rong served as a personal name. 71 For this reason, Liu Yu interprets the Western Zhou version of rong as an auxiliary or supplemental rite; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 500. This is in accord with Liu Yuan’s assessment that, in the Shang OBI, rong indicated a stage or portion of ritual events – usually one occurring near the beginning – rather than referring to such events in their entirety; see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , p 116. I would suggest that in the Fan you inscription, at least, rong plays as important a role as di , the other rite conducted with it. 72 For a detailed discussion of the Mai fangzun inscription, see the section on da li 大禮 in the following chapter.

117

Both the Mai fangzun and the Shu Ze fangding are early Western Zhou vessels; their

inscriptions record ritual events that the Zhou kings conducted while establishing the political

infrastructure of the Zhou state. The Fan you , in contrast, is a middle-Western-Zhou vessel

commissioned by a subordinate (and likely kinsman) of a figure called by the title “Duke” ( gong

公). 73 Its inscription records two separate instances of rong within a short time of each other:

隹（唯）九月初吉癸丑，公祀，旬又一日辛亥，公啻（禘）辛公祀，卒事亡… It was the ninth month, the chuji moon phase, the guichou day. The Duke performed a rong -offering. Eleven days later, on the xinhai day, the Duke performed the di/chi offering and rong to Duke Xin. The business was completed without harm… (Fan you 繁卣 [5430])

The Fan you inscription unambiguously describes two separate instances of rong , separated by a

significant chronological gap. 74 No additional rite term is given for the first instance, as in the

Shu Ze fangding inscription. Given that fact; considering the chronological separation between the first instance and the second ( rong/di ) instance; and given that both the Mai fangzun

inscription and the Fan you inscription match rong with the term si 祀, “offering, sacrifice,” it appears that by the time Fan commissioned his you -vessel, at least, rong was a viable rite in its own accord, conducted in conjunction with other rites but understood as separate. Like the personage conducting the rite, the target of the second rong , at least, carried the title gong 公; we can reasonably assume that Duke Xin was an ancestor of the contemporary Duke and that the rong in question should thus definitely be understood as ancestral rites.

As recorded in the Western Zhou inscriptions, rong was held only in conjunction with

other rites – in two out of three cases, as part of multi-day ritual events – and only in contexts in

73 On the dating of the Fan you and the likely identity of Fan, see section 2.1.1.1.2 above. 74 On the problem of the dates specified in the inscription, see note 18 above. The important point here is that the two occurrences did not occur on successive days, for instance.

118

which political activities were conducted that left traces in the bronze inscriptions. The two early

Western Zhou cases of rong were part of major events at which the Zhou king sought to legitimize his authority in a ritual context and strengthen bonds between the royal house and the uppermost echelon of Zhou adherents. 75 The single middle Western Zhou inscription containing

rong , that of the Fan you , records no associated inter-lineage political activities. It does,

however, explicitly record that the performance of the rong and di rites created an opportunity

for Duke ( gong 公) to grant rewards to a subordinate and likely kinsman (Fan). Apparently, then,

rong was not a personal rite, as hui and yu sometimes were; it appears in the Western Zhou

materials only in cases in which multiple attendees are mentioned by name or title. 76

The Fan you inscription contains the latest appearances of rong , not just in the bronze inscriptions, but in any source. It has been suggested that rong was equivalent to rong 肜 and that both that term and the related term yi 繹 served a similar purpose in later received texts. 77

The case for this theory is weak, and the use of rong  in the Western Zhou inscriptions does

not support its identification as a “next-day” rite; rong 肜 is more likely a separate concept that

existed in parallel with, and apparently survived longer than, the practice known as rong  .

Like yu , but unlike hui, rong , it would seem, did not become part of the overall shared milieu of Zhou ritual as expressed in the bronze inscriptions. Its specific association with major, multi- day ritual and largesse-distribution events likely contributed to its decline, as the Zhou royal

75 For more on the Shu Ze fangding as a record of a political event, see the preceding section on hui . For a full translation of the Mai fangzun inscription and its analysis both as a ritual event and as an exemplar of the forces driving the institutionalized creation of inscribed ritual bronzes, see chapter 4. 76 By contrast, compare the highly personal inscription of the Zuoce Yi you , or the many vessels with inscriptions commissioned for the purpose of hui . 77 Scholars fall into two camps in this regard: those who feel that it probably indicated a liquor offering, at least at some point; and those who connect it with the character 肜 and hold that it indicated the performance of a rite on the day after a different rite. The former group includes Chen Mengjia and Yu Xingwu; the latter includes Tang Lan and Liu Yu. See the excellent summary of the prior debate in Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 500, n. 2.

119

house and other powerful Zhou elites shifted gears to promote a different model of legitimacy

and pursue different strategies for maintaining the established hierarchy of the Zhou state.

2.2.2.3: Yu 禦 (exorcism/warding)

The bronze inscriptions contain a few examples of the term yu 禦, used by both the

Shang and the Zhou to denote what one might call a “negative entreaty” – that is, a plea to the

spirits to prevent or, more often, to repair some uncomfortable situation. 78 Chronologically, the occurrences of yu in the bronze inscriptions group neatly into two clusters: a few dating to the late Shang or early Western Zhou, and two appearing in the unusual late Western Zhou inscriptions associated with King Li, with none whatsoever dating to the middle Western Zhou period. These break neatly along a primary criterion of this study as well – the early Western

Zhou occurrences were all the work of non-royal elites, while the two late Western Zhou occurrences appear on the King Li bronzes. The following section will thus approach them separately, beginning with the late Shang and early Western Zhou cases.

2.2.2.3.1: Non-royal instances of yu 禦 (early Western Zhou)

A total of four early Western Zhou bronzes contain the term yu 禦 as a rite name in their inscriptions. Of these, the key source inscriptions on the term yu 禦 are borne by two vessels: the Wo ding 我鼎 (2763) and the Zuoce Yi you 作冊益卣 (5427). 79 Reputedly discovered near

78 As opposed to the “positive entreaty,” represented by hui , in which a particular benefit is requested. Liu Yuan draws on these two terms as the basis of his characterization of late Shang ancestral worship; see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 119-31. As we will see, hui is much better represented in the Western Zhou inscriptions than yu , and the negative nature of the latter is less clear in the main later example. 79 The remaining two vessels, the X zun 尊 (5952) and the Zuo Yu Fu Xin zhi 作禦父辛觶 (6472), are simple

120

Luoyang, the former vessel was obtained in several pieces and later restored. 80 Its inscription describes a ritual event dedicated to two ancestral couples but focusing on the ancestresses, who received additional secondary rites. The ritual vocabulary of the inscription is quite unusual in the Western Zhou context. The secondary rites targeting the Two Mothers mentioned in the inscription – yue 礿 and sai (束又示) – have no further precedent in the JC bronze inscriptions; they appear only in the Wo ding inscription (see Appendix 1). The latter, however, appears as a rite name in the Shang oracle bones, wherein, as is the case here, it is frequently an auxiliary rite. 81

Based on this point of vocabulary, on the use of Shang-style funerary names for both ancestors and ancestresses, on the inclusion of a clan mark, and on the reported discovery of the bronze at Luoyang, it is tempting to conclude, as Liu Yu does, that the Wo ding is of Shang rather than Western Zhou provenance. 82 Without stronger internal evidence in the inscription

requiring a pre- or post-conquest dating, however, that distinction is impossible to make. If, as

MWX and JC hold, the Wo ding is indeed a Western Zhou vessel, then it is a strong point of

continuity between the pre- and post-conquest ritual practices of Shang-heritage elites. 83 As will later become clear, such continuity was a specific concern of early Western Zhou kings. Here, our main concerns are that such continuity of practice included the use of the yu rite; that in this

case, the yu rite admitted the use of secondary rites; and that it could target ancestor-ancestress

pairs as well as ancestors.

liquor vessels of unknown provenance. Though JC dates them to the early Western Zhou, their dedications to figures with ganzhi names and, in the Zuo Yu Fu Xin inscription, the use of a clan mark raise the question of a possible Shang connection. Their inscriptions offer little information of use on yu 禦 beyond citing instances of its performance. 80 JC 2763. 81 Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi zhong , 105-6. 82 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong.” 505-6, dates the Wo ding to the Shang. 83 For the MWX dating, see MWX 125, 85.

121

If the Wo ding inscription shows the possible range of targets of the yu rites and confirms its continued performance among Shang-heritage elites, the Zuoce Yi you inscription confirms its continued use as a measure to ward off misfortune. Chapter 1 considered this inscription briefly; a full translation appears below:

乍（作）冊嗌乍（作）父辛，（厥）名義，曰：子子孫孫寶。不彔（祿）嗌 84 子子先衋死，亡子。子引有孫，不敢 （貺）鑄彝，用乍（作）大禦于 85 （厥）且（祖）匕（妣）、父母、多申（神），母（毋）念哉，弋勿 嗌鰥寡，遣祜石（祏）宗不刜。 Document Maker Yi makes a zun -vessel for Father Xin. Its inscription is meant to say, “Sons’ sons and grandsons’ grandsons treasure [it].” Unfortunately Yi’s departed son has already passed on ahead of him, and he has no sons. It is through sons that one has grandsons (i.e., descendants). Not daring to (?) bestow a cast vessel, [Yi] thus performs a great yu -exorcism rite toward his grandfathers and grandmothers, his father and mother, and the many spirits. Ah, remember! 86 Indeed, do not cut Yi off, widowed and alone; grant blessings and aid [so that] the zong -line is not cut off. (Zuoce Yi you 作冊益卣 [5427]) 87

The Zuoce Yi you (fig. 2.1, Appendix 2) was created in the wake of the death of Document

Maker Yi’s son; it seems to have been a retooling of a previously commissioned vessel to fit Yi’s

unpleasant new circumstances. The loss of Yi’s only son was a tragedy from both a personal and

familial standpoint; since Yi’s son left behind no sons of his own, Yi’s ancestral line was in

danger of ending with him. Under these stressful circumstances, Yi turned to the yu rite, retooling his vessel for that purpose as an appeal to his ancestors to alleviate his misfortune. The list of targets Yi provided was extensive, including his parents, the previous generations of his

84 The transcription of the previous three characters follows MWX , 95; the gloss of kuang 貺 is from the AS database. The meaning of the clause is unclear; see MWX , 95 n. 4. 85 My transcription and interpretation of this character follow MWX , 95 n. 7. 86 I take wu 毋 as an intensifier here, as per MWX ’s reading; see MWX , 95. 87 Ma Chengyuan interprets this inscription differently, taking some of the characters as the name of Document Maker Yi’s son; see MWX 142, 95, n. 4. It is also possible that Yi’s son had been dead for some time before the commissioning of the vessel. My impression, however, based on Yi’s objection to the typical closing of the inscription, is that a vessel with a more regular inscription had already been commissioned when the tragedy struck.

122

family, and the vague category “the many spirits,” which may have simply referred to other

deceased family members or may have included outside forces. This unusual breadth of target

likely reflects Yi’s extreme personal distress and desperation. Yi here intended yu in the same sense it carried in the Shang oracle bones: as a provision of ritual offerings intended to secure the help of the spirits in correcting a misfortune in the face of which the petitioner felt helpless. 88

2.2.2.3.2: Royal instances of yu (late Western Zhou)

After the above cluster of inscriptions, the term yu 禦 disappears from the Western Zhou

inscriptions, only to resurface in those of the Hu gui 簋 (4317) and the Fifth-year Hu zhong 五

祀鐘 (358), both dating to the late Western Zhou and generally attributed to King Li. 89 In

both inscriptions, the term appears in the closing lines as a declared purpose of the vessel, in line

with the later uses of hui seen above. In fact, the Hu gui inscription contains both terms, as we have seen above in the section on hui . Despite the lack of detail of the clause containing yu, its use in the Hu gui inscription does suggest two important ideas: first, that Hu planned on

88 Malinowski discusses in detail the idea of anxiety over uncontrollable circumstances, especially with respect to death, as a driving force behind the practice of magical rites among the Trobriand islanders; see Bronislaw Malinowski, Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays , Garden City: Doubleday, 1954, 28-32. For Malinowski, the yu rite of Document Maker Yi would fall firmly in the category of “magic” as opposed to “religion,” given that it had a specific goal; see p. 38. For an early critique of this position, see George C. Homans, “Anxiety and Ritual: The Theories of Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown,” American Anthropologist 43.2.1 (Apr.-Jun. 1941), 164-72; for a later one, see Stanley J. Tambiah, Magic, Science, Religion, and the Scope of Rationality , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 65-83, esp. 68-70. For an excellent aggregate treatment of the targets, beneficiaries, sacrificial methods, and sacrificial quantities associated with yu in the Shang materials, see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 122-31, esp. tables 7 and 8. In keeping with his practice of avoiding focusing on rite names, Liu refers to the phenomenon by the term rangfei zhi ji 禳襏之際, “rites of exorcism.” The specific examples cited in the section, however, consistently contain the term yu , and Liu’s table 8 contains a column labeled “person exorcised” ( bei yu zhe 被禦者). Unlike in the bronzes, the character yu 禦 had yet to be consistently differentiated from yu 御 in the Shang OBI. In fact, JGWZGL identifies a range of characters as variants of or loans for yu 御; see JGWZGL , 391, 407. 89 Shaughnessy thus includes both bronzes in his chart of dating standards; see Shaughnessy, Sources , 110-1, 169-70.

123

performing several instances of yu ; and second, that at this point, the same vessel could be involved in both yu and hui , the positive entreaty. The closing lines of the Fifth-year Hu zhong offer one additional, important tidbit:

…其萬年永（畯）尹四方，保大令，乍（作）疐才（在）下，御大福，其各。唯王五祀。 May [I,] Hu, oversee and be chief of the Four Directions for ten thousand years eternally; protect the great mandate, and make prostrate those below; and perform yu -exorcism for great fortune. May [I] fulfill [these expectations]. It was the king’s fifth offering-cycle.

The Fifth-year Hu zhong employs the character yu 御, absent the altar radical, in place of yu 禦;

the similarity of the two inscriptions suggests this reading, which is otherwise uncommon in the

bronze inscriptions. 90 The notable difference here is that this case of yu has da fu 大福, “great

fortune,” as its object. The stipulation of a positive goal for yu is a departure from the

understanding of the rite in the Shang OBI and in the Zuoce Yi you , in which it was employed to

ward off misfortune and alleviate disaster rather than to seek blessings. Judging from this point,

from the use of yu together with hui in the Hu gui inscription, and from that inscription’s

apparent assumption that the performance of several future yu could be predicted, the composers of the above two inscriptions understood yu differently than did Zuoce Yi and his early Western

Zhou contemporaries. The use of the term in the King Li inscriptions suggests that their

commissioners saw yu as an ordinary, predictable rite aimed at procuring favor from the

ancestors rather than as an ameliorative measure for use in times of crisis. Given the term’s

complete absence from the inscriptions of the middle Western Zhou, the rite itself must have

fallen out of favor, at least as a purpose of ancestral bronzes; its use in the King Li inscriptions

90 For this reading see the AS database; Mu Haiting and Zhu Jieyuan, “Xin faxian de Xi Zhou wangshi zhong qi Wusi Hu zhong kao,” Renwen zazhi 1983.2, 118. This portion of the rubbing is exceedingly difficult to make out. With respect to yu 御 as a loan for yu 禦, I have surveyed all 93 occurrences of the former character in JC and have found only this case in which it seems to refer to a rite.

124

was likely meant to evoke a sense of venerable antiquity without concern for the details of its

previous performance. 91

2.2.2.3.3: Yu in the Zhouyuan oracle bones

Bone H11:1 of the Zhouyuan oracle bones contains a character that Zhouyuan jiaguwen

transcribes as . The transcription is certainly correct in assessing the upper-right element of

the character as . However, I suspect Liu Yu is still correct in identifying this character as yu

禦.92 This inscription then provides a point of linkage between Shang and Zhou practices of yu , appealing, as it does, to the last Shang king, Di Yi, in the latter portion of the inscription. 93

Unfortunately, the details of the inscription reveal little about the Zhou approach to yu beyond its continuity with the practices reflected in the Shang oracle bones.

2.2.2.3.4: Summary

Bronze inscriptions, Zhouyuan oracle bone inscriptions, and received texts all record that the early Western Zhou saw the use of a rite known as yu . Judging from the Zuoce Yi you inscription in particular, that rite was similar in purpose to its Shang predecessor – that is, it was meant to prevent or eliminate misfortune through an appeal to ancestral spirits, both male and female. The instances of yu recorded in early Western Zhou bronze inscriptions were all

91 Rawson sees the use of built-in square stands like that of the Hu gui as a hint of archaicism; see Jessica Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” in Cambridge History, 439. 92 See Zhouyuan jiaguwen , 1. The Zhouyuan case adds an altar radical shi 示 to the base character yu 御 (or rather, in this case, ); apparently this custom, which became the norm in the bronze inscriptions, had been taken up by the Zhouyuan oracle bone scribes. 93 The role of Shang kings and ancestors in the Zhouyuan oracle bones is the topic of some controversy; see the discussion of hui -entreaty in the Zhouyuan oracle bones below.

125

conducted by non-royal elites who referred to their deceased ancestors with Shang-style ganzhi funereal names; probably the practice was held over among former Shang-affiliated elites who participated in the activities that gave rise to the institution of inscribed bronzes as a widespread phenomenon. The appearances of yu in the Zhouyuan oracle bones and in the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu suggest that Zhou kings at least occasionally performed the yu rite; however, no surviving bronze inscriptions record royal yu rites as political events, as with the di and hui rites. 94

As practiced by the Shang kings (and other Shang elites) during the late Shang, and by

former Shang elites and, potentially, by Zhou kings during the early Western Zhou, yu 禦 served to alleviate anxiety under extreme circumstances. 95 This may explain why the Zhou kings did not make yu part of their political program. No extant inscriptions narrate the attendance of elites at political events centered on yu , as with the di and hui rites. Neither do any record royal

gifts or gifts from superiors intended to support yu , as we have seen with the previous rites; in

fact, the most detailed inscription mentioning yu , that of the Zuoce Yi you , suggests that its vessel was retooled to support the commissioner’s exigent need for a yu -rite. Yu , it would seem,

was meant to deal with specific, unpleasant circumstances – like, for example, the bloody

aftermath of the conquest of Shang 96 – and as such was unsuitable for the kind of planned, bond-

forging events that the Zhou royal house organized around di and hui . It was a poor basis for the distribution of royal largesse, since for the king to award goods to someone for use in yu would have been tantamount to wishing misfortune on them. Likewise, its unpredictable chronology made it a poor medium for strengthening bonds between the royal house and subordinate elites;

94 See Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu , 211. 95 See note 88. 96 This is the context of the yu recorded by the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu .

126

the times of crisis that called for yu would have been precisely the times when those bonds were

tested most strenuously.

After the early Western Zhou, the rite called yu disappears from the record, only to resurface

in the inscriptions of two late Western Zhou vessels commissioned by King Li. Given the

chronological gap between the King Li vessels and the prior appearances of yu as a rite name, the

term’s use in the inscriptions is likely part of an effort at antiquarianism. 97 Either way, the Fifth- year Hu zhong ’s declared purpose of yu for “great fortune” ( da fu 大福) does not accord with the prior understanding of the rite as a defense against undesirable events; the composers of the inscription may not have been aware of this association or may have seen it as flexible.

The relative paucity of yu in the bronze inscriptions as compared with the Shang oracle bones was due to its failure to serve these interests of the Zhou royal house. Certainly, the suitability of inscribed bronzes as a materialization of positive interactions with the king played a role in the expansion of their use during the Western Zhou, as compared with the periods preceding and following. 98 Yu served that purpose poorly, at least from the standpoint of the royal house. It is no surprise, then, that yu failed to gain a foothold in the custom of the creation of inscribed bronzes, as its positive counterpart hui did; its disappearance as of the middle Western Zhou period, when the format of inscriptions came to reflect the royal control of prestige in an even more formulaic manner, makes good sense. 99

Later occurrences of the term show that yu , “warding,” “exorcism,” or “defense,” continued to be understood as a goal of ritual, if not as a specific rite, well after the power of the Zhou royal

97 See note 91. 98 See the discussion of inscribed bronzes as a manifestation of the royal presence, following Gell’s model of “distributed presence,” in chapter 1. 99 On this shift, see the discussion of appointment inscriptions in chapter 4.

127

house was broken. 100 It is likely that the propitiation of ancestors as a ritual phenomenon continued after its disappearance from the bronze-inscriptional record; that it left little trace in the inscriptions simply because its purposes did not coincide with the interests that drove the creation of inscribed bronzes; and that the severing of that association weakened the specific ritual implications of the term yu , so that the composers of the King Li bronzes used it differently than in the earlier inscriptions, and the compilers of later texts clarified its meaning with additional terms. 101

2.2.3: Terms forming the shared rubric of Western Zhou ritual

2.2.3.1: Hui ȼ (entreaty) 102

The activity referred to as hui ȼ, “entreaty,” is one of the most ubiquitous devotional practices in the Western Zhou inscriptions. 103 JC lists 18 distinct inscriptions containing the term in this sense and dating to the Western Zhou, along with an additional case of ambiguous late

Western Zhou-Spring and Autumn date and two cases of definitive Spring and Autumn date (see

Appendix).

100 See Dong Zengling, Guoyu zhengyi, Guiji Zhang shi shixuntang, 1880, 406; Liji, “Jifa,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1590- 1; Chen Qiyou, Lüshi chunqiu jiaoshi, Shanghai: Xuelin, 1984, 422. 101 The Guoyu and Liji cases listed above use han 扞/捍, “to ward off,” while the Lüshi chunqiu case uses nuo 儺, “to exorcise.” See ibid. 102 This section consistently replaces the Academia Sinica’s renderings of hui with the font character Ο. 103 This character is unused in modern Chinese but can be pronounced as hui (based on its Shuowen entry); see Shuowen , 497. It has many other functions in the Western Zhou inscriptions; besides serving as a personal name, it appears frequently as a chariot implement (in the fixed phrase Ο); sometimes as a type of garment; and, in forms both with and without the added radical chuo 辶, in the sense of “assist.” For uses of Ο as a personal name, see the Jing gui (04273) and Shanfu Shan ding 膳夫山鼎 (2825) inscriptions; for occurrences as a garment, see the Jifu hu 幾父壺 (9721-2) and Wang Chen gui 王臣簋 (4268) inscriptions; for occurrences referring to a chariot implement, see the Mu gui 牧簋 (4343), Wu fangyi gai 吳方彝蓋 (9898), and Shi Ke xu (gai ) 師克盨(蓋) (4467-8) inscriptions; and for cases of “assist,” see the Shi Qiang pan 史牆盤 (10175) and He zun (6014) inscriptions (with the chuo 辶 radical) and the Guaibo gui 乖伯簋 (4331) inscription (without). These various readings of the character are discussed in JWGL 1359, 6127-53.

128

The following section will separately consider the inscriptional traces of hui -entreaty left by the Zhou kings and those left by other Zhou elites. The first category records mostly specific occurrences of hui -entreaty, while the second consists mainly of inscriptions declaring hui - entreaty as a purpose of the vessels bearing them, though there are important individual exceptions in each case.

2.2.3.1.1: Royal performances of hui recorded by high-ranking elites

Descriptions of hui performed by the Zhou king occur mainly in inscriptions dating to the early Western Zhou period, when royal ritual events at which hui-entreaties occurred provided a context for management of relations with elites of the very highest ranks. A recently excavated bronze, the Shu Ze fangding , describes a relevant instance of the rite tied to major political events of the early Western Zhou period:

隹 (唯) 十又四月，王 大ȼ 在成周。咸ȼ，王乎殷厥士，齊叔夨以、衣、車、馬、貝卅朋。敢對王休，用乍（作）寶尊彝，其萬年揚王光厥士。104 In the fourteenth month, the king performed a rong rite and greatly used documents to perform entreaty ( hui ) at Chengzhou. When the entreaty was finished, the king called an audience of his retainers, 105 [rewarding?] Shu Ze with a (?), a garment, a chariot and horse, and thirty strings of cowries. 106 [Shu Ze] dares to respond to the king’s beneficence, therewith making a precious, revered vessel. May [he] praise the king’s honoring of his retainers for ten thousand years.

The Shu Ze fangding was recovered from the cemetery of the rulers of the state of Jin, in the Fen river valley of Shanxi. 107 Li Boqian has plausibly suggested that it dates to the reign of King

104 This transcription follows Li Boqian, “Shu Ze fangding mingwen kaoshi,” Wenwu 2001.8, 39. 105 I here take yin 殷 as equivalent to jin 觐, “to have audience,” following Ma Chengyuan’s interpretation in MWX 115, 80, n. 1b. 106 Following Li Boqian, 40, I refrain from identifying the character  . 107 On this vessel see Beijing daxue kaogu wenbo yuan and Shanxi sheng kaogu yanjiu suo, “Tianma-Qucun yizhi

129

Cheng, based partly on the Shang-style use of a fourteenth, intercalary month; certainly, the

reference to Chengzhou in the inscription means that it postdates the construction of that

polity. 108 Based on a paleographical analysis of the character ze 夨, Li further suggests that the vessel was probably produced by the figure known in historical records as Tangshu Yu 唐叔虞, the first ruler of the Jin state and younger brother of King Cheng, whom the Bamboo Annals record was installed by King Cheng during the tenth year of his reign. 109 Whether or not

Tangshu Yu in particular commissioned the vessel, the circumstances of its discovery make it quite likely that it belonged to an early member of the Jin marquesal line.

The case describes a pattern common in the inscriptions: The king conducts a major ritual event involving one or more ancestral rites; during or after the ceremonies, he then publicly rewards a subordinate, who casts an inscribed bronze to commemorate the event. The provenance of the Shu Ze vessel in particular suggests its association with a lesser scion of the royal family – one whose new domain would later become one of the most powerful states to emerge from the collapse of Zhou royal power. Unlike most of the di/chi inscriptions, the Shu

Ze fangding inscription records no recounting of merits, assistance with the rite, report of a successful campaign, or other justification for the commissioner’s presence, beyond the assumption that he was one of the “retainers” ( shi 士) that the king summoned. The vessel

commissioner’s status itself was apparently sufficient justification for both his presence at the

rite and the reward. We will see below that this is generally characteristic of the accounts of

royal entreaty rites in the early inscriptions.

Beizhao Jinhou mudi di liu ci fajue,” Wenwu 2001.8, 4-21, esp. 9, 14-5; Li Boqian, “Shu Ze fangding mingwen kaoshi,” Wenwu 2001.8, 39-42. 108 See Li Boqian, 40-1. Li sees the use of a fourteenth month as an indication that Zhou calendrical techniques had yet to progress beyond those known under the late Shang. 109 Li Boqian, 40-1; see Bamboo Annals , King Cheng, 10 th year, 146. On Tangshu Yu’s relationship to King Cheng, see Shiji , 1635-6.

130

If Tangshu Yu or one of his near descendants did indeed commission this vessel, he

would have had a personal investment in the rites conducted, belonging as he did to the same

patriline as the king; likewise, the king would have had a strong interest in maintaining good

relations with him, as the assigned ruler of one of the most powerful and strategically significant

regional domains. I strongly suspect that Li Boqian is correct in attributing the vessel to

Tangshu Yu, or that it was produced by his son at the latest. The inscription refers to its

commissioner by the seniority term shu in combination with a personal name, suggesting that, in the context referred to by the inscription, the commissioner’s seniority status within his generation needed more emphasis than the specific lineage to which he belonged; this would surely have been true of a scion of the royal house. 110

In this inscription, then, we see the utility of ancestral rites as a relationship management tool in the political context of the early Western Zhou. The occasion of the entreaty and associated devotions offered motivation for Shu Ze, likely a member of the Jin marquesal line and descendant of the Zhou kings, to attend the king at Chengzhou; this in turn allowed the king to reinforce bonds with his kinsman through the gift of prestige goods, while situating those bonds within the hierarchical relations between king and retainer.

Another bronze, the Xianhou ding , confirms that King Cheng in particular conducted hui

in the Zhou heartland as well:

唯成王大ȼ，才（在）宗周，商（賞）獻侯囂貝，用乍（作）丁侯彝。〔〕111 。 When King Cheng conducted a great entreaty at Zongzhou, [he] awarded cowries from (?) to the Marquis of Xian. 112 [The Marquis] therewith makes a revered vessel for Marquis

110 Characters preceded by seniority terms are generally interpreted as personal names; words *preceding* seniority terms, on the other hand, are usually understood as lineage names, as in the example of “Da Zhong” in the Da gui inscription, cited above. See the discussion of branch lineage names in Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 252. 111 For this transcription of the clan mark on this bronze, see MWX , 24. 112 The character preceding bei 貝 is to be read as xiao 囂; I am indebted to Li Feng (personal communication, May 2012) for this observation. MWX reads this character as the personal name of the Marquis; see MWX , 16 n. 2. I am inclined to see it instead as a specification of the origin of the cowries. Shirakawa raises this possibility; see

131

Ding. (Clan mark.) (Xianhou ding 獻侯鼎 [2626-7])

Unfortunately, the identity of Xianhou, translated here as “the Marquis of Xian,” and the location of the state Xian 獻, if indeed there was such a state, are unclear. 113 Xianhou appears to have been of Shang cultur al affiliation, judging from the inclusion of the clan mark , common on Shang bronzes and from the use of the ganzhi designation ding 丁 to refer to the vessel dedicatee. 114 The format of the name of the dedicatee Dinghou opens up the possibility that the

Xian in Xianhou might not have referred to the location of the bearer’s state, as would be usual for a name of the “X hou” format. Without further information on a potential state of Xian, it is difficult to speculate on the exact relationship between Xian hou and the Zhou king. However,

Xian’s likely Shang heritage, combined with the fact that Xian is absent from the Zuozhuan list of Ji-surnamed regional states founded during the early Western Zhou, suggests that the two did not share patrilineal blood tie s, as was likely the case with Shu Ze. 115 Xianhou was probably an allied elite of relative importance, judging from his bearing of the title hou 侯, reserved for certain regional lords. Here again, then, in the context of an entreaty to the royal ancestors, the king awards largesse to an aristocrat of high rank. The inscription again records no particular service rendered to the king by the recipient, implying an assumed right of the recipient to the king’s patronage based on status.

One further early Wes tern Zhou inscription, the document duplicated on the Yu gui 圉

Shirakawa 7.29, 335-6. 113 Xiqingyi suggests the possibility that the Marquises Xian and Ding mentioned in the inscription were the similarly named rulers of the royal line of the state of Q i; see Xiqingyi 1.6. Shirakawa refrains from this identification; see p, 338. 114 On the commonality of the clan mark, see MWX 24, n. 3, 16; on ganzhi names, see On ganzhi cult names, see David N. Keightley, The Ancestral Landscape, Berkeley: UC Berkeley, C enter for Chinese Studies, 2000, 33 -5, and Sarah Allan, The Shape of the Turtle , Albany: SUNY Press, 19-56. 115 See Zuozhuan , Duke Xi 24, Shisanjing zhushu , 1817. On this and the other numberings of Western Zhou regional states, see Li Feng, Landscape and P ower , 71.

132

簋 (3824-5), the Yu yan 圉甗 (00935), and the Yu you 圉卣(5374), records the king’s rewarding of an elite in the context of a hui -entreaty with no additional context provided:

王ȼ于成周，王易（賜）貝，用乍（作）寶彝。 The king conducted an entreaty at Chengzhou. The king awar ded Yu cowries. [Yu] therewith makes a precious, revered vessel. (Yu gui 簋 [圉簋] [3824-5]) 116

The Yu set of inscriptions offers us even less information about their commissioner than did the

Xianhou ding . Fortunately, the provenance of the Yu vessels is well understood. They were recovered in the 1970s, from tomb M253 in the Yan 燕 state cemetery at Liulihe, Fangshan,

Beijing (with the exception of Yu gui no. 1, JC no. 3842, which had reputedly found its way to a tomb at Kazuo county, Liaoning province). 117 Given the size of tomb M253 and the richness of its grave goods, and given that Yu was able to commission a number of elaborately decorated vessels with the same inscription at a time when vessel sets were not yet the norm, we can surmise that Yu was a f igure of substantial influence in the early Western Zhou political world, probably a scion of the marquesal line of the state of Yan. 118 Again, then, the Yu inscriptions record the bare fact of attendance of an influential figure at a royal entreaty – poten tially the same entreaty recorded in the Shu Ze fangding inscription – without additional justification; in this case, the attendee would have had to travel across most of modern China in order to take part. 119

116 On the Yu gui , see Beijing shi wenwu yanjiu suo, Liulihe Xi Zhou Yan guo mudi , 1973-1977 , Beijing: Wenwu, 1995, 80, 84-6; for the yan , 88-9; for the you , 95-9. 117 On tomb M253, see Liulihe , 26-7; on Yu gui no. 1, see Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji , Beijing: Wenwu, 1993 -8, 6.12. 118 For this assessment see Liulihe , 128 -9. As the report notes, since the tomb contains vessels cast by a figure called Jin 堇 as well, it cannot be determined whether or not Yu was the tomb occupant. 119 Li Feng has noted the p ossibility that these two bronzes record rewards that occurred at the same event; see Bureaucracy , 259.

133

2.2.3.1.2: Royal hui as an opportunity for subordinate elites

The above inscriptions record interactions between the royal house and the upper

echelons of the Zhou aristocracy in the context of hui -entreaties. These entreaties provided

political opportunities and responsibilities for elites of lesser status as well; such opportunities

spurred greater elaboration in the inscriptional record due to the indirect nature of the rewards

they produced. Two early Western Zhou inscriptions, the Yu jue 盂爵 (9104) and the Shu gui 叔

簋 (4132), record such interactions.

The Yu jue , a bronze liquor cup probably dating to the reign of King Kang, records the

Zhou king’s dispatching of a representative to the state of Deng, probably located in modern

Henan: 120

隹（唯）王初ȼ于成周，王令盂寧（鄧）白（伯），賓（儐）貝，用乍（作）父寶 彝。 When the king first conducted an entreaty at Chengzhou, the king ordered Yu to pacify the Elder of Deng. [Yu] received a guest-gift of cowries. [Yu] therewith makes a precious, revered vessel for [his] father[s]. (Yu jue 盂爵 [9104])

In this case, the initial contact between the vessel commissioner and the royal house that justified

the inscription took place in the context of the entreaty event, while the reward that financed the

creation of the vessel was received later and secondhand, from the upper-level aristocrat to

whose service the commissioner was assigned. Yu, it would seem, was not important enough to

receive a royal gift directly at the entreaty. However, the occasion of the entreaty created the

opportunity for Yu’s assignment to a lucrative position by the king, and so it was duly recorded

120 MWX 64, 44, n. 2. There is some debate as to the relationship of the Yu that commissioned this vessel to the Yu that commissioned the Xiao Yu ding and Da Yu ding ; for a summary of that debate, see Shirakawa 35, 385-91. Shirakawa dates the vessel to the Cheng-Kang period, while MWX assigns it specifically to King Kang; see MWX , 44.

134

in the inscription.

The Yu referred to in the inscription was quite possibly the same Yu known from the Da

Yu ding (2837) and Xiao Yu ding (2839) inscriptions, and potentially the Yu you (5399)

inscription. 121 If so, two interesting points come to mind. One is that Yu did not receive a direct

royal reward at the hui ceremony, despite the fact that by the end of King Kang’s reign, he would

enjoy not one, but two special royal acknowledgement ceremonies; we will see one of these in

more detail in chapter four. Either the king’s first entreaty rite predated the rise of Yu’s star at

the royal court, or convention prevented Yu from receiving a reward without attached conditions;

perhaps his official rank was not high enough. The second point is that the Yu of the Da Yu ding and Xiao Yu ding inscriptions was an accomplished warrior; the Xiao Yu ding inscription

records, among other things, the king’s acknowledgement of his successful campaign against the

Guifang. 122 If the Yu that commissioned the Yu jue was the same figure, one wonders what was involved in the duty of “pacifying” ( ning 寧) the Elder of Deng. Certainly Yu received the cowries that supported the commissioning of the inscription as a guest-gift ( bin 賓); but it seems

possible that the king’s choice of Yu in particular as his emissary reflected a coercive element to

the interaction.

Another two bronzes of probable early Western Zhou date, the two Shu gui 叔簋 (4132-

3), record the queen’s involvement in an interaction between elites on the occasion of a hui

121 See previous note; see also Shirakawa 35, 394. MWX does not go so far as to suggest outright that the Yu of the Yu you is the same as the Yu of (according to Ma) the Da Yu ding and the Yu jue ; see MWX , 44-5. Another Yu is now known to have been active during the Western Zhou, based on a pair of ding discovered in a cache in Hubei in 1996; see Hubei Huanggang shi bowuguan and Hubei Qichun xian bowuguan, “Hubei Qichun Dacheng Xinwuwan Xi Zhou tongqi jiaocang,” Wenwu 1997.12, 29-33. These, however, employ the alternate character

form (image from AS database). Based on that and on their discovery in Hubei rather in Shaanxi, where the other Yu bronzes were discovered, they were likely produced by a different Yu. The characters naming the caster of the so-called Yu yan (NA1591) are difficult to confirm due to damage. 122 See the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839).

135

rite: 123 During a royal entreaty at Zongzhou, Shu was lucky enough to receive the queen’s command to attend the Grand Protector, also known as the Duke of Shao, whose vital role in the administration of the early Western Zhou state is well known. 124 The Grand Protector’s generous reward to Shu for his service was comprised entirely of prestige goods of both inherent utility and ritual significance; metal could be used to make vessels, while dark wine and grain- fed cattle were potential offerings for ancestral devotions. 125 Again, the reward that the vessel commissioner Shu received came from the Grand Protector, to whom he had been sent, rather than directly from the king (or, in this case, the queen); by thanking the Grand Protector in the dedication, Shu makes that clear. However, the inscription still records the royal hui rite as the origin point of the interaction, maximizing the prestige involved by noting Shu’s connection with the royal house in explicit terms.

During the early Western Zhou, then, a series of royal entreaties of ancestors conducted

during the reigns of Kings Cheng and Kang provided a venue for political interactions between

the royal house and elites of various levels of prestige. Involvement of different levels of elites

gave rise to different sorts of inscriptional records. Greater detail in those records did not

coincide with greater status of the commissioners. In fact, the inscriptions recording attendance

of higher-ranking elites at the royal hui rites seem to have required less detail in order to justify the involvement of their commissioners, suggesting that elites of high status were assumed to be potential attendees. High-ranking Zhou aristocrats were apparently eligible for direct royal

123 These vessels appear in Shirakawa under the heading “Shu suiqi ” 叔隨器; see Shirakawa 6, 77-83. Shirakawa compares their calligraphy to that of the Cheng Wang fangding (1734), implicitly suggesting a corresponding date; JC notes that Yu Xingwu has questioned the authenticity of that vessel. Duandai assigns the Shu gui to King Cheng, while Tang Lan assigns them to King Kang; see Shirakawa, 77. 124 See Shaughnessy, “The Role of Grand Protector Shi in the Consolidation of the Zhou Conquest,” in Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Chinese Classics , 137-64. 125 Baijin , “white metal,” is also mentioned in the Western Zhou inscriptions of the Rong Zhong ding (NA1567) and the Ping Zhong 甹鐘(48); yuchang 鬱鬯, “dense wine,” appears in the Xiaozi Sheng zun 小子生尊 (6001) inscription; grain-fed livestock are mentioned, as we have seen, in the Da gui inscription.

136

rewards, while lesser figures made do with lucrative appointments that produced later benefits by

virtue of their connections with resource-distributing elites of rank.

The distribution of those bronzes for which provenance is known suggests that ranking

elites traveled appreciable distances in order to attend. Unlike the di rite, which took place at

peripheral locations such as Pangjing and Yi, the royal hui -entreaties were held only at the key

centers of Zhou power, Zongzhou, at the capitals of Feng/Hao in the Zhou heartland, and

Chengzhou, the recently founded eastern capital. 126 The royal house of the early Zhou apparently employed the hui rite as a context for managing relationships with high-ranking elites

from across the Zhou cultural sphere, both by rewarding them directly, as in the Shu Ze fangding ,

Xianhou ding , and Yu vessel set inscriptions, and by dealing with them through intermediaries,

as with the Elder of Deng in the Yu jue and the Grand Protector in the Shu gui .

2.2.3.1.3: Non-royal sponsorship of hui : the Ze Ling bronzes

Based purely on quantity of occurrences, the practice of hui by non-royal aristocrats

seems to have been fairly widespread and to have endured throughout most of the Western Zhou

period.127 The traces of non-royal hui in the inscriptional record, however, are of quite different

character than those left by the kings’ entreaties. Hui apparently described one of the primary

motivations behind the creation of inscribed bronzes, and, as such, most of its appearances in

non-royal inscriptions are formulaic in character. Still, one exception from the early Western

126 There is some debate on the location of Zongzhou; for a summary, see Maria Khayutina, T’oung Pao 96 (2010), 6, n. 13. 127 I find four inscriptions suggesting the performance of non-royal hui -entreaty dating to the early Western Zhou, four dating to the middle Western Zhou, and one to the late Western Zhou (all dates following the AS database). These are compiled in table 2.1, Appendix 2 (“Vessels declaring hui as a purpose”), with the exception of the inscription shared by the Ze Ling vessels, for reasons discussed here. The Hu gui , which also appears in that table, was probably commissioned by King Li (see note 145).

137

Zhou furnishes even more detail about hui than did the royal cases: that of the Ze Ling fangzun

夨令方尊 (6016) and Ze Ling fangyi 夨令方彝 (9901) inscriptions.

The Ze Ling vessels, reputedly discovered in 1929 at Mapo, Luoyang, Henan, were once owned by Liu Tizhi; the fangzun is now in the collections of the Palace Museum, Taiwan, and the fangyi in those of the Freer Gallery in Washington, D.C.128 Much like the Mai fangzun

inscription, the Ze Ling inscriptions begin with an account of honors that the vessel

commissioner’s superior – in this case, Ming Bao 明保, the Duke of Zhou’s son – was granted at

a royal audience. 129 After receiving a broad-ranging appointment from the king, 130 Ming Bao

(also called “Duke Ming” [ Minggong 明公] in the inscription) then undertook a mission to the

eastern capital Chengzhou, where he issued orders to a variety of officials of different levels. Ze

Ling, the vessel commissioner, was probably present for this; based on the word order of the

inscription, it appears that he was ordered to accompany Ming Bao to Chengzhou in order to

work with the Ministry ( qingshiliao ) there. 131 Ming Bao completed his business with a series of

sacrificial offerings at important venues in the Chengzhou area: the Jing Temple ( Jinggong 京

宮), probably related to the “Jing Hall” mentioned in the He zun inscription;132 the Kang Temple

128 See JC 6016, 9901 (AS database); Zhensong 7.19. 129 On Ming Bao, and for a full translation of the Ze Ling inscriptions, see Bureaucracy , 50-2. For a full account of the Mai fangzun inscription, see chapter 4. 130 The king grants Ming Bao control over “the Three Affairs in the four directions” and the Ministry (see Bureaucracy , 51). That is to say, Ming Bao is granted supervisory capacity over the top-ranking military, civil, and agricultural officials across the sphere of royal control, as well as over the body of officials directly associated with the royal court (for more detail on the relevant offices, see Bureaucracy , Appendix I, 305-14). This appointment must have made Ming Bao one of the most powerful officials, if not the most powerful, besides the king himself. 131 There is some ambiguity in the inscription here on two points: first, whether it was Ming Bao (referred to as “duke” [ gong 公] elsewhere in the inscription) or the Duke of Zhou (at whose gong 宮 the order occurred) who issued the order to Ze Ling; and second, whether the Ministry with which Ze Ling was to work was the version located at the western or eastern capital. Given that the sources trace the Ze Ling bronzes to the vicinity of Luoyang (see Zhensong 7.19v), I am inclined to think that Ze Ling was employed at Chengzhou and that the inscription records his assignment to relocate to that area (or perhaps to return, given that Ze Ling seems to have been of Shang descent). 132 On the possible relationship between these two locations and with the jingzong 京宗 mentioned in the inscription

138

(Kanggong 康宮); 133 and a location called wang , “royal,” likely identifiable with wangcheng 王

城, the “King’s City,” around which centers much debate on the early structure of

Chengzhou/Luoyang. 134 After the third leg of his sacrificial tour, Duke Ming issued the rewards that make up the germane portion of the inscription:

…明公歸自王，明公易（賜）亢師鬯、金、小牛，曰：用。易（賜）令鬯、金、小牛， 135 曰：用。廼令曰：今我唯令女（汝）二人，亢眔夨，奭  （左）右于乃寮（僚） （以）乃友事。乍（作）冊令（命）敢揚明公尹（厥），用乍（作）父丁寶彝， 136 敢追明公賞于父丁，用光父丁。〔 冊〕 …Duke Ming returned from Wang[cheng]. Duke Ming awarded Kang Shi dark wine, metal, and a small (young?) ox, saying, “Use these for hui -entreaty.” [The Duke] awarded Ling dark wine, metal, and a small ox, saying, “Use these for hui -entreaty.” [He] then issued commands, saying, “Now I command you two men, Kang and Ze, to fervently assist your colleagues and allied officials.” 137 Document Maker Ling dares to respond to Duke Ming’s beneficence, thereby making a precious, revered vessel for Father Ding, daring to procure Duke Ming’s reward for Father Ding, 138 thereby to glorify Father Ding. (Clan mark.)

The dynamic of Duke Ming’s relationship with his various subordinates is of note. The broad mandate which the Duke brought to Chengzhou was granted at a personal audience with the king; given the scope of his commands, Duke Ming was effectively the royal representative at Chengzhou. Ming Bao either could not or did not, however, command the personal presence

of the Ban gui 班簋 (4341), see Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” 63. 133 As Li Feng notes in Bureaucracy , 51, the Kang Palace is the subject of disagreement in the field. The main problem is whether the term necessarily referred to a structure established for the posthumous worship of King Kang, which would then require a post-King Kang date for the Ling vessels. The full argument is beyond the scope of this dissertation; for lists of relevant sources and an English-language approach to the problem, see Bureaucracy , 1, n. 16, and Shaughnessy, Sources , 193-216. It has now been shown, however, that the locations known as gong 宮 were sometimes named for living individuals who used them as personal workspaces; see Li Feng, “’Offices’ in Bronze Inscriptions and Western Zhou Government Administration,” Early China 26-7 (2001- 2), 1-72, esp. 4-14. 134 See Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 64-5. 135 The transcription of this character follows MWX , 69/ 136 The transcription of this clan mark follows MWX , 69. 137 Following Ma’s reading in MWX , 68, n. 8. 138 That is, as Li Feng puts it, to “forward” the reward on to the deceased Father Ding. See Bureaucracy , 51. I follow Li Feng also in rendering  as “beneficence.”

139

of the wide range of elites over whom he had been granted temporary authority; rather than

summoning the officials and regional rulers in question, he is said to have “sent out” ( [chu 出]) orders. 139 In fact, after his commands were finished, Duke Ming was apparently compelled personally to visit several important local venues to make offerings. It is particularly notable that he performed sacrifices at the royal compound, despite the fact that the king must still have been in the heartland at the time. My impression is that the brief sacrificial tour afforded Ming Bao the opportunity to shore up local support, both from powerful Chengzhou-area lineages and from the personnel of the royal holdings at Chengzhou. The eastern capital was still relatively new at this point, and Duke Ming must have needed the support of local elites in order to function effectively as a royal representative.

The rewards that Duke Ming issued after completing the sacrificial tour, and the offerings they were meant to support, facilitated the channeling of prestige from the royal house, through the organization of the central government at large, into the social context of individual lineages.

While directing their cooperation in the operation of the Chengzhou branch of the Ministry,

Ming Bao rewarded Ze Ling and Kang Shi with sets of goods that included all the basic material resources necessary for sponsoring an offering event: liquor for drinking, livestock animals for feasting, and metal for producing bronzes. This created a direct relationship between the service

Ze Ling and Kang Shi rendered to Duke Ming in his governmental activities and their ability to provide for the activities of their lineage cults. We know that Ze Ling then intentionally made the provenance of these resources, and hence the details of this relationship, known in the context of his cult activities, based on the use of the terms zhui 追, “pursue, [here] direct,” and guang 光, “glorify,” at the end of the inscription.

139 MWX , 63, n. 8.

140

By “glorifying” Father Ding with the goods received from Duke Ming, Ze Ling improved his father’s, and hence his own, profile within the context of the ancestral cult; he converted recognition received for actions outside the lineage to prestige and recognition within the lineage through the medium of the hui -offering. When recording this recognition on an inscribed devotional bronze, he detailed not only the circumstances of his own service to Ming Bao and concomitant reward, but the entire sequence of events beginning with the king’s assignation of special authority to Ming Bao. The bronze produced thus allowed Ze Ling to maximize the impact of his accomplishments within the social context of his lineage cult by drawing an indirect connection to the Zhou royal line.

2.2.3.1.4: Hui as a declared vessel purpose

Several Western Zhou inscriptions declare hui -entreaty as an intended purpose of the

creation of the vessels that bear them (table 2.1, Appendix 2). It is thanks to these cases, in fact, that we can state with some confidence that the practice referred to as hui in the Western Zhou inscriptions, like the corresponding Shang rite, involved requesting favors of supernatural forces. 140 Parallel use of similar verbs in a number of inscriptions confirms this; consider, for

example, the inscription of the Bo Hu gui 伯簋 (4073), an early-middle Western Zhou vessel, 141 in which hui is used as a compound verb with qi 祈, “to pray for,” in a request for

140 On hui as a rite of entreaty in the oracle bones, see JGWZGL 1533; Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi zhong , 109; Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 501-2; Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 119-28. As Liu Yuan’s table shows, hui -entreaties in the OBI target a much broader range of entities than those seen in the Western Zhou inscriptions, including royal ancestors both distant and near, both male and female, as well as natural entities such as the River ( He 河) and the Peaks ( Yue 岳). For examples, see H00378.r, H01588, H00460, H00385. (OBI identifiers in this work follow the numbering scheme used in the CHANT database maintained by the Chinese University of Hong Kong [http://www.chant.org ].) 141 The AS database assigns the vessel to the early Western Zhou; Duandai ’s incomplete analysis states King Gong

141

longevity. Several cases of hui in the inscriptions are of this type. They are well distributed

chronologically, ranging across the entire period and continuing down into the early Spring and

Autumn inscriptions. Geographically speaking, most such bronzes with established provenance

were found in the Zhou heartland in Shaanxi, though one Spring and Autumn-era bronze, the Qi

Bo Mei Wang pan 杞伯每亡盆 (10334), was discovered in Shandong. 142

Performers occupied a variety of positions along the parallel status continua of state and

lineage. 143 A number of the vessel commissioners bore the epithet bo , “Elder,” suggesting their

status as first sons or lineage heads; the name of the commissioner of the Ji Xin zun 季尊

(05940), however, suggests that he ranked low in the sequence of his siblings. 144 From a political standpoint, the preeminent commissioner of such a bronze was King Li, with whom the

Hu who cast the Hu gui is normally identified. 145 Xing, commissioner of the Xing zhong 

鐘 (246), seems also to have been of high status, given that several of his ancestors, including his father, carried the epithet gong 公.146 The political status of the other commissioners is

difficult to determine, but Shi Chen, for example, would seem based on his title to have been

someone’s subordinate. 147 The inscription of the Shi Chen ding 事晨鼎 (2575) helps to confirm that assumption; its use of the actions of a lineage head, “Elder Father Yin” ( Bo Yinfu 伯殷父),

as a terminus ante quem. See Duandai , 338. 142 Places of discovery following the AS database. 143 Based on the usual syntax of the inscriptions in question (see for example the Bo Hu gui inscription, translated above), I suspect that bronzes declaring their production for the purpose of hui were actually used for such by their commissioners; that is to say, I assume that the commissioner of a vessel was the understood subject of the term hui in its inscription, unless otherwise stated. It is admittedly possible that bronzes commissioned “for use in entreaty” ( yong hui 用ȼ) were open for use by other lineage members; however, I know of no specific evidence to support this idea. 144 On seniority terms, see Sena, 123-4. 145 On this argument, see Shaughnessy, Sources , 110-1, 169-70. 146 The Xing zhong is from the famous Zhuangbaicun bronze cache no. 1, the most extensive hoard of Western Zhou bronzes yet discovered, which produced the Shi Qiang pan and other important bronzes; see Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui, “Shaanxi Fufeng Zhuangbai yi hao Xi Zhou qingtongqi jiaocang fajue jianbao,” Wenwu 1978.3, 1-18. 147 The term shi 事, the first component of Shi Chen’s name, means “to serve.”

142

as a dating reference suggests that Shi Chen occupied a subordinate position within his patriline.

Judging solely from its occurrence as a declared purpose of vessels, the concept of hui -

entreaty was apparently widespread among Western Zhou elites, regardless of comparative status

within either lineage or state, who were in a position to participate in the production of inscribed

bronzes and the devotional activities for which they were used. Bronzes that declare hui as a

purpose rarely specify the intended target of the entreaty as an object of the verb hui .148 When targets are obliquely specified, they are patrilineal ancestors of the vessel commissioners. 149 The

inscriptions sporadically record the intended goals of the entreaties to be conducted; the most

common goal is longevity, though the Ji Xin zun and the Yi zhi break this pattern. Overall, these cases portray hui-entreaty as a standard mode of ancestral ritual activity, solidly entrenched

throughout Zhou society and closely tied to the institutional production of bronzes, which

endured throughout the Western Zhou period.

The relationship of this use-pattern of hui to the examples in accounts of royal events bears consideration. Based especially on its occasional appearance together with qi 祈, “to pray,” it is

theoretically possible to interpret hui in these cases as a generic verb meaning “to pray,” rather than as a specialized ritual term. 150 However, the earliest of these cases – those of the Ji Xin zun , the Bo Hu gui , and the Shi Chen ding – were contemporary with, or at least not far distant from,

the major royal events of the early Western Zhou for which hui was a justifying principle; their commissioners must have been aware of the royal use of hui as a lynchpin of ritual events.

Moreover, the nature of the gifts conveyed by Ming Bao to his helpers, as recorded in the Ze

148 The “targets” listed in the Appendix are all such cases, with the exception of the Wei ding inscription, in which Ji Zhong is simply listed as the vessel dedicatee. 149 One may feasibly read “the prior cultured men” ( qian wen ren 前文人) of the Xing zhong inscription as a general reference to admirable figures of previous generations, regardless of lineage; I suspect, however, that the phrase simply refers to deceased members of the lineage who are not mentioned by name. 150 On the problematic nature of this distinction, see note 152.

143

Ling inscriptions, indicate that the hui he envisioned them conducting would take place in the

context of ancestral devotions. It should be noted as well that no cases of hui in the sense of

“entreaty” target living figures or other supernatural entities; as far as the inscriptions show, hui -

entreaty was a technical process restricted to the ancestral cult. 151

To my mind, the clear statement of the bronzes themselves that they were to be used for hui

demands the interpretation of the term as an ancestral-ritual activity, if not a full rite in and of

itself. 152 In the absence of specific and compelling evidence for a discontinuity between the

records of individual hui -entreaties – particularly that in the Shu Ze fangding inscription – and

declarations of intent to hui with ritual bronzes, I take the two usage patterns as aspects of the same continuous and intrinsically ritual phenomenon.

2.2.3.1.5: Hui in the Zhouyuan oracle bone inscriptions

As Liu Yu has pointed out, two of the Zhouyuan oracle bones bear inscriptions mentioning the hui -entreaty:

貞王其ȼ又周方白(X)  正不于受又又 Divined: Shall the king entreat ( hui ) assistance 153 from Da Jia and perform ce 154 toward the Elder of the Zhoufang…155 correct, not to hinder 156 receiving assistance. (H11:84r)

151 There are cases in which hui takes a living person as its object; see the inscriptions of the Guaibo gui 乖伯簋 (4331) and the Gua Zi you 寡子卣 (5392). In these cases, the context makes clear that the term means “to assist” and can be understood as a substitution for the form of the character with an added chuo radical 辶, for which see the inscriptions of the He zun (6014), the Shi Qiang pan (10175), etc. 152 The distinction between “rite” and “ritual action” is problematic. Most of the terms considered here, including rong, liao, etc., appear in the inscriptions as elements of ritual events rather than free-standing events in their own right, despite their obvious ritual character – as is the case, for example, with the hui-entreaty and rong-offering recorded in the Shu Ze fangding inscription. Through a case study of the Mai fangzun, chapter 5 of this work will address how the Zhou royal house combined these individual ritual actions into coherent events that pursued varying strategies of group formation and maintenance. For further discussion of this issue, see the Introduction to this work. 153 Reading you 又 as you 佑, “to assist.” 154 This reading is extremely tentative. The relationship of the terms here to the following phrase Zhoufang Bo , “the Elder of the Zhoufang,” is unclear. The term ce  and the related characters ce 冊 and  have enjoyed a

144

彝文武丁…貞王翌日乙酉其ȼ爯中…武丁豐 … 王 Vessel (?) Wen Wu Ding…divined: On the next day, the day yiyou , shall the king make a hui -entreaty, raising a flag…157 Wu Ding (?) 158 …to hinder the king. (H11:112) 159

These two bones sparked an intense debate in the field concerning the relationship

between the ritual practices of the pre-conquest Shang and Zhou populations.160 Based on the

use of the term fang 方 to refer to the Zhou – a usage which is to my knowledge otherwise

unrepresented in the Zhou materials – I think we can safely state that, as Liu Yu has suggested,

variety of interpretations, as Martin Kern has recently pointed out in “The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China,” 152-4. These three terms are to a certain degree interchangeable in the OBI, although there is a demonstrable distinction between  and 冊 as well; see JGWZGL , 2969. In the Shang OBI, frequently acts as a verb, orten referring to a manner of sacrificial offering; see Matsumaru Michio and Takashima Ken’ichi, eds., Koukotsu moji jishaku souran , Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku, 1993, 12, 259-62, 585; cited in Kern, “The Performance of Writing,” 153; see also JGWZGL , 2964-9. There is some question as to what the particular nature of this offering was, as the opinions gathered in Matsumaru and Takashima, 12, show (again, see Kern, 1953). Without taking a reductive stance on this issue, we may note that in the phrase ce hui ȼ in the inscription of the Shu Ze fangding , discussed above, ce  is in the normal position for an adverb, suggesting that the king “entreated with documents.” It is possible that the ce  both here and in the Shu Ze fangding inscription meant “to cut,” a meaning which has been observed for ce-series characters in the OBI (on which see in particular Yu Xingwu, “Shi ‘ce,’” Jiaguwenzi shilin, Beijing: Zhonghua, 1979, 172-4, cited in JGWZGL, 2967-8). However, Wang Yuxin has pointed out that ce  in the sense of “cutting” was normally used towards sacrifices of lower status, including animals; see “Zhouyuan miaoji jiagu ‘ce Zhoufang bo’ xinxi,” Wenwu 1998.6, 67-71, esp. 71). It is thus likely that the ce 冊 element of the character in both these bone inscriptions and the Shu Ze fangding inscription was here meant in its later sense, indicating that documents were used in association with a hui -entreaty. 155 The reading of the character here rendered xin  is problematic. Shaughnessy reads it as si, meaning “desire,” while Li Xueqin reads si 斯, “this,” and Xu Xitai suggests xi 西, “west.” See Edward L. Shaughnessy, “Zhouyuan Oracle-Bone Inscriptions: Entering the Research Stage?”, Early China 11-2, 156-7; Li Xueqin, “Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?”, EC 11-2, 173-4; Xu Xitai, Zhouyuan jiaguwen zongshu, Sanqin, 1987, 59. 156 Shaughnessy, “Zhouyuan,” 156, reads the character  as “harm”; Li Xueqin, “Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?”, uses “mistake”; Xu Xitai, 59-60, suggests “inconvenience.” 157 This reading follows Li Xueqin, “Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?”, 173, and Xu Xitai, 72, in reading the phrase here transcribed 爯中 as “to set up a banner.” 158 Li Xueqin, “Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?”, 173, reads feng 豐 here as li 醴, “wine, to drink”; Xu Xitai, 72, identifies it as a ritual item. 159 Zhouyuan jiaguwen , 64, 78. Transcriptions follow those given in that work. Shaughnessy offers a fuller transcription of H11.84r, including a transcription of the character marked (X) (left untranscribed in Zhouyuan jiaguwen ), in Shaughnessy, “Zhouyuan,” 156. 160 The main issues in this debate were whether the king mentioned was the Shang king; whether the Zhou elite could make offerings to the Shang kings; and whether the bones were produced at Zhouyuan, or produced at Anyang or another site of Shang power and then taken to Zhouyuan separately. See the series of articles beginning with Shaughnessy, “Zhouyuan,” and including Wang Yuxin, “Once Again on the New Period of Western Zhou Oracle Bone Research,” Early China 11-2, 164-72; Li Xueqin, “Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?”, 173-6; Fan Yuzhou, “Some Comments on Zhouyuan Oracle Bone Inscriptions: A Response to Edward L. Shaughnessy,” EC 11-2, 177-81; and “Extra-Lineage Cult in the Shang Dynasty: A Surrejoinder,” EC 11-2, 182-94. For a later update, see Zhouyuan jiaguwen , 1-8.

145

the bones in question were produced before the conquest of Shang. 161 They are sufficient proof to show that certain Zhou elites (specifically, the “Elder of the Zhou People” mentioned in the inscription) must have been familiar with the hui -entreaty as practiced by the Shang – though perhaps not enough to show that the Zhou practiced it themselves, as Liu Yu suggests. 162

2.2.3.1.6: Summary

Hui is, fortunately, a common term in the Western Zhou inscriptions, and furnishes us with a substantial pool of examples for consideration. The above examination has shown that the Zhou elite, like the Shang before them, used the term hui to refer to the ritual entreatment of spirits for blessings. 163 Judging from their production of bronzes for the purpose, Zhou elites of various

ranks practiced hui -entreaty, ranging from the royal house to local subordinate elites (such as Shi

Chen). However, the geographic distribution of bronzes bearing the term hui with known

provenance is mainly limited to the Zhou heartland. Despite the relative commonality of the

term, the existing evidence is thus insufficient to show that the practice of hui -entreaty was

disseminated across the entire Zhou cultural sphere; it would seem, however, that it did cross-cut

distinctions of rank.

The Western Zhou inscriptions mostly lack details on offerings associated with hui . The Ze

Ling inscriptions record that Ming Bao’s gifts to his subordinates, intended to support hui -

entreaty, included liquor, oxen, and metal -- goods capable of supporting a wide range of

161 See Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong ,” 501-2. The term fang 方, in Shang usage, referred both to the extremes of the cardinal directions and to the outlying populations they held, relative to the power-holding Shang at the center of the system. The Zhou were thus unlikely to apply the term to themselves, although, as the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839) inscription shows, they did continue to apply it to problematic populations such as the Guifang 鬼方. 162 Liu Yu, Jinwen zhong , 501-2. 163 For an excellent resource on hui -entreaty during the Shang, see the tables in Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 126-8.

146

devotional activities. This fact, and the extraordinary typological variety of bronze vessels that

record their creation for the purpose, suggest that in the Western Zhou period, hui -entreaty was not tied to a specific mode of sacrifice, but was seen as a general purpose of or framework for devotional offerings. 164

Bronzes recording entreaties performed by the Zhou kings do not record the favors for which

the ancestors were entreated. 165 Vessels of various dates that record hui -entreaty as a purpose of

their creation, however, do specify goals, typically longevity or the receipt of blessings. That the

inscriptional records of specific cases of hui do not do so is likely because such details were not

important to the commissioners of the inscriptions, whose interests in recording the rite centered

on the rewards they received.

During the early Western Zhou, the Zhou royal house conducted a number of high-profile

hui -entreaties that served as venues for the negotiation and maintenance of political relationships

with various ranks of elites. These entreaties took place at the major centers of Zhou power

(Zongzhou, in the Zhou heartland, and Chengzhou, the newly built capital to the east); high-

ranking Zhou aristocrats from across north China, such as Shu Ze 叔夨, the Marquis of Xian 獻

侯, and Yu , traveled substantial distances to attend. These powerful elites received largesse

directly from the Zhou king, with no justification given in the relevant inscriptions; their right to

attend the royal hui -entreaties seems to have been implicit, although their receipt of royal

rewards at these events was still sufficient grounds for producing inscribed bronzes. The desire

164 This line of thought approaches the distinction between “rite name” ( jiming 祭名) and “sacrificial method” (yongshengfa 用牲法) that Liu Yuan has recently and rightfully called into question; see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 19-24. I would suggest that there is no reason to expect that the Shang, or even the Zhou, would themselves have recognized the distinction, and substantial reason to believe that their conception of certain ritual actions such as hui -entreaty was fluid enough to admit different diagnostic criteria in different social contexts; what was hui at a royal ritual event might not map perfectly to hui in the context of local ancestral cults. On this idea of “fluidity” as an attribute of “social objects,” see Mol and Law, 659-60. 165 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 502.

147

of the royal house to manage its relationship with important power-holders such as the Elder of

Deng and the Grand Protector also created opportunities for lesser elites such as Yu 盂 and Shu

叔 to earn recognition and rewards, which they then recorded on inscribed bronzes for use in the ancestral cult, allowing them to leverage those rewards for status and prestige within the context of their individual lineages. Whatever its devotional import, the royal practice of hui -entreaty during the early Western Zhou helped the Zhou kings shore up the interpersonal relationships between regional elites that made up the infrastructure of the newly formed Western Zhou state.

After the early Western Zhou, the Zhou kings seem to have perfomed hui -entreaty less, or at

least under less high-profile conditions; only the Hu gui attests to royal performance of hui after

that point. Based on this, Liu Yu has characterized the early Western Zhou as the “golden age”

of the hui -entreaty among the Zhou. 166 If we account for inscriptions recording concern with hui

among non-royal elites, however, the custom seems to have remained popular during the middle

Western Zhou period and to have survived throughout the Western Zhou era and into the early

Spring and Autumn period. Hui is virtually absent from received texts, however, as well as from

bronze inscriptions dating to the middle Spring and Autumn period and later. Given the

relatively centralized distribution of bronzes that record their production for the purpose of hui , it

is likely that the term, if not the custom it described, was specifically associated with the Western

Zhou institution of inscribed bronze production, with its focus on contact with the Zhou kings. 167

As the importance of the Zhou royal house as arbiter of prestige faded, the term hui as a reference to entreaty of ancestral spirits receded from the historical record. Further work on

Eastern Zhou sources will help determine whether the custom itself waned as well.

166 Ibid., 501. 167 On the Zhou king as a prestige hub to which elite lineages were connected through “nexus ancestors,” see chapter 1; on the efforts of the royal house to maintain the king as an “obligatory passage point,” in Callon’s terms, see the conclusions to this chapter and the following chapter.

148

2.2.3.2: Zheng 烝/蒸 (deng 登)

The bronze inscriptions contain several instances of characters of the approximate form

, alternately transcribed as zheng 烝, zheng 蒸, deng 登, and deng 鄧, depending on the transcribers’ sense of its meaning. 168 The character functions as a rite name (in which sense it is

usually read as zheng 烝 or zheng 蒸) in the inscriptions of several vessels of Western Zhou date, as well as one probable Shang vessel and one early Spring and Autumn vessel. Much as with hui , the occurrences of zheng include records of specific cases conducted as well as declarations of

zheng as the purpose for which the vessel in question was cast. The former category includes

only cases in which the Zhou king was the prime actor, while the latter includes only vessels of

non-royal provenance. The following analysis will thus begin from this division.

2.2.3.2.1: Cases of zheng in Western Zhou inscriptions: royal performances

Vessels recording the Zhou king’s performance of the ritual act referred to as zheng 蒸 survive from throughout the Western Zhou period. The famous Da Yu ding (2837), one of the longest and most detailed inscriptions of the early Western Zhou period, contains two occurrences of the term zheng .169

The first is part of a royal announcement characterizing the activities of the king’s predecessors. The Da Yu ding inscription is special in that most of its length directly records a

168 For example, the AS database lists zheng 烝 for the character in the inscription of the Taishi Cuo dou 大師豆 (4692), zheng 蒸 for the first occurrence in that of the Da Yu ding ; deng 登 for that in the Deng Zuo Zun Yi you 登作尊彝卣 (5115) inscription; and deng 鄧 for that in the inscription of the Deng Xiaozhong ding 鄧小仲鼎 (2528), despite the essential similarity of the characters. See Appendix 2, fig. 2.2. 169 The Da Yu ding is generally dated to the reign of King Kang, along with the Xiao Yu ding ; see MWX 62, 37; Duandai 100-4. Shaughnessy includes it as one of his dating standards; see Sources , 110-1.

149

royal speech given on an occasion when the king appointed Yu, who had assisted in the king’s

education, to a new office and granted him lavish rewards. 170 Yu’s new appointment seems to have had a regulatory function, in which vein the king’s speech took pains to promote King Wen as the moral model to be followed. As a lead-in to this point, the king characterized the moral accomplishments of King Wen and, in particular, King Wu. Among the latter figure’s good points, we are told, was his temperance in the performance of the rites 髭 and ; the latter of

these is certainly zheng 蒸.171 The account offers no further details, but it is certainly of note that

1) the current king held that King Wu had performed zheng , and 2) zheng was, at the time of composition of the Da Yu ding inscription, seen as a process in which consumption, and perhaps over-consumption, of liquor might be expected. 172

The most concrete example of royal performance of zheng from the early Western Zhou is that noted in the inscription of the Gao you (5431), a vessel known only from the Song collections: 173

〔亞〕。隹（唯）十又二月，王初旁，唯還在周，辰才（在）庚申，王酓（飲）西宮，（蒸）, 咸, 釐，尹易（賜）臣 僰。174 揚尹休，高對乍（作）父丙寶

170 Following the model proposed in MWX , wherein Yu had worked in the king’s “school”; see MWX , 39, n. 14. The Da Yu ding is in a sense the prototypical appointment inscription, produced at a time when the process had yet to be codified to the degree seen in the middle Western Zhou inscriptions. 171 I am less than convinced that the former term is chai 祡, as JC renders it; see the discussion on chai in the Appendix. 172 The latter portion of the Da Yu ding inscription contains an instance of the character form , the form used for zheng in the Gao you and Duan gui inscriptions. The context is quite different; as part of his admonitions to Yu on future service, the king requests that Yu should “morning and night assist me, the solitary man, with zheng for the Four Directions” (  [夙]夕 [召]我一人[烝]四方). MWX draws on an Erya gloss to suggest that zheng here means something like “to rule, to be lord of”; see MWX , 40, n. 22. Given the context, I am inclined to agree with this reading. 173 The recent edition of Duandai suggests a Cheng-Kang date for the Gao you ; see Duandai , 343. 174 The punctuation of the preceding clause follows Duandai , 343, though the transcription of the character bo 僰 is still that of the AS database. I follow Duandai , 343, in reading zhui 隹 and the element transcribed in AS as xiao 小 together as one character , largely because the element here rendered zhui 隹 in AS bears little resemblance to the other cases of zhui in the inscription. The transcription has been adjusted accordingly.

150

彝，尹其亙萬年受（厥）永魯，亡競才（在）服，長 （疑）其子子孫孫寶用。 (Ya .) It was the twelfth month, when the king first feasted at Pang. When he returned to Zhou, on the morning of the gengshen day, the king hosted drinking at the Western Palace and performed zheng . When it was finished, gifts were awarded. 175 The Chief gave servants [from among the] Que?bo. 176 Praising the Chief’s beneficence, Gao responds by making a precious, revered vessel for Father Bing. May the Chief continue for ten thousand years to confer his eternal brilliance, without peer in service. May the descendants of Zhi, the head of the Ji, treasure and use it. 177 (Gao you 高卣 [5431])

The prestation relationships recorded in this inscription were complex. The Zhou king held the drinking event and associated zheng -offering that occasioned the gift to Gao, which in

turn precipitated the casting of the inscription. The king did not, however, give this gift/reward;

instead, it was carried out by a figure called the Chief ( yin 尹). 178 The vessel commissioner Gao then praised the Chief’s beneficence in response, designating him as the significant patron for purposes of the gift. Gao went on to cast the Gao you for Father Bing, commemorating the reward in the context of his ancestral cult. He referred to the aforementioned Chief near the end of the inscription, making reference to his “service” ( fu 服). The final clause of the inscription,

175 I differ with the transcription given in the AS database in finding a sentence break immediately after xian 咸. The word li 釐 I read here as referring to the subsequent conferral of gifts, on analogy with, for example, the inscription of the Hai gui 簋 (NA1891). 176 I suspect that the “Que?bo” 僰 referred to the same group called bo 僰 led by assignatories of the Zhou court on campaign against the Eastern States ( dong guo 东国) during the middle Western Zhou, as recorded in the inscriptions of the Shi Mi gui (NA0636) and the Shi Yuan gui (4314), or to a subset of that group. In the latter inscription, the list of parties led against the east also includes the Tiger Servants ( hu chen 虎臣) and the Ji  , mentioned in the last line of the Gao you . It is likely that all these terms referred to parties operating in the direct service of the king at the Zhou royal court. The term Ji  was also the name of an aristocratic lineage and potentially of a regional state, as seen in the inscriptions of the Ji Zhong zhi 仲觯 (6511) and the Jihou Di ding 侯弟鼎 (2638). The groups designated Ji may have been related; my sense, however, based on the use of the term zhang in the final line of the Gao you inscription, is that the Ji referred to in the Gao You, Shi Mi gui , and Shi Yuan gui inscriptions was a vocational group, unrelated to the Ji  lineage. It is possible that the feasting and prestation events recorded in the Gao you inscription were related to the campaign mentioned in the Shi Mi gui and Shi Yuan gui inscriptions; however, this is far from certain. 177 Rather than reading zhi  as yi 疑, as in the JC inscription, I take it as the personal name of the figure Ji Zhang, “the head of Ji.” For another example of zhi used as a personal name, see the inscription of the Yanhou Zhi ding 匽侯旨鼎 (2628). 178 Li Feng notes the later use of yin 尹, “Chief,” to refer to the Chief Interior Scribe ( Neishi Yin 内史尹); see Bureaucracy , 77. The Cheng-Kang dating for the Gao you suggested by Duandai , however, would make it too early a vessel to support that connection.

151

however, commits the vessel to the use of the descendants of “Zhi, the head of the Ji” ( Ji zhang

Zhi 長 ). 179 Based on the location of its appearance, this phrase likely refers to Gao himself,

but that is not certain. 180

The relative status of the various parties mentioned is difficult to decipher based on the

Gao you inscription alone. In all likelihood, the Chief was a subordinate of the king who took

part in the drinking event and the zheng -offering. 181 Gao, to whom the Chief gave the “servant” or “servants” (chen 臣) after the zheng rite, may have been the Chief’s subordinate, or he may

have been a royal functionary whom the king tasked the Chief to reward. He may have played a

role in the drinking event and the zheng -offering, or he may simply have been present at the time and reaped the benefits; these may or may not have been redistributions of a corresponding reward given by the king to the Chief. We can state with certainty only that the king hosted a drinking event that included an instance of the offering called zheng , and that the occasion created a context for the Chief to convey a reward of servants to a figure named Gao, who commissioned an inscription to commemorate the occasion.

Before leaving the Gao you inscription, we should note that the event occasioning the

king’s performance of zheng was a drinking-party rather than a combined feast and drinking

event, as is sometimes specified in the inscriptions. 182 This suggests a connection between zheng and liquor compatible with that appearing in at least one received textual source of possible

179 I depart from the AS database in its reading of zhi  as yi 疑. 180 The final clauses of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions often commend the vessels bearing them to the use of the commissioners’ ancestors; examples are too numerous to list. 181 Whether the Chief was a permanent attaché of the Zhou royal court, or whether he made a special trip to attend the events described, is not certain; based, however, on the frequent use of yin 尹 as an addendum to titles for royal officials, I am inclined to think that the Chief was probably a regular member of the royal court. See the examples of “Chief Document Maker” ( Zuoce Yin 作冊尹) and “Chief Interior Scribe” ( Neishi Yin 內史尹), described by Li Feng in Bureaucracy , 311 and 309, respectively. 182 See for example the inscription of the Tianjun gui 天君簋 (4020).

152

Western Zhou date. 183 It may be obliquely relevant that the vessel bearing this inscription, according to Bogu , was of a type normally used to hold liquor. 184

The inscription of the Duan gui 段簋 (4208), a middle Western Zhou vessel of unknown

provenance held by the Shanghai Museum, records another instance of zheng performed by the

Zhou king: 185 The case of zheng described in the Gao you inscription was held on the king’s

home ground at Zongzhou; in fact, the king conducted it only after returning from nearby

Pangjing. Here, in contrast, the king conducted a zheng -offering at Bi – a location of importance to the royal house, but apparently, based on the king’s mentioning of the name Bi Zhong, also the territory of another elite lineage. 186 The multi-day event of the king’s visit included both the zheng -offering and a recounting of merits for Duan, the commissioner of the vessel. During the

latter process, the king recalled the lineage of a figure named Bi Zhong, presumably an ancestor

of Duan’s; this suggests that Duan was related at least peripherally to an elite lineage with

authority over the area. 187 With Duan’s merits recounted, the king then ordered a figure called

Gong Zhi 龏  to make a great apportionment of land to Duan. 188 As no further details are offered on Gong Zhi, it is not possible to determine whether he was a local elite or whether he

183 See the discussion of the Shijing poems “Feng nian” and “Zai shan” below. 184 Bogu 11.18, cited in AS database. Since the vessel is no longer extant, this is difficult to confirm; collections sometimes disagree about the shape category to which a particular vessel belongs. It is harder still in the case of the Gao you , for which Bogu lists only the cover. 185 JC dates the Duan gui to the middle Western Zhou; Shirakawa assigns it to King Zhao; see Shirakawa 74, 829. See also MWX 261, 188, which dates the bronze to a much later king (King Yih). 186 On the location of Bi, see Bureaucracy , 151-2 and n. 3. 187 Since Duan’s presumptive ancestor bore the seniority term zhong 仲, “second son,” he may have been the founder of a branch of the main Bi lineage; on the other hand, it is at least possible that the lineage of Bi Zhong became the dominant one in the area. On the problem of interpreting the nomenclature format (lineage name) (seniority term), see Sena, 123-4. The Bi lineage was likely connected to the royal house through the figure of Duke Bi ( Bigong 畢公), a clansman of King Wu (see Shiji, “Wei shi jia,” 1835; Bureaucracy , 56, 56 n. 27); who, according to several received historical texts, played a key role in the conquest of Shang and the events of the early Western Zhou period; see Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 120-1; “Wei shi jia,” 1835; Bamboo Annals , King Kang 12 th year, 148; Shangshu , “Gu ming,” Shisanjing zhushu , 237; “Bi ming,” 244. Li Feng notes Duke Bi’s appearance in the inscription of the Shi Tian gui 史簋 (4030-1); see Bureaucracy , 56 n. 27. For the tradition that Bi was founded by a son of King Wen, see Zuozhuan , Duke Xi, 24 th year, Shisanjing zhushu , 1817, cited in Shiji , 1835 n. 1. 188 For this reading, see MWX , 189, n. 4.

153

traveled to Bi along with the king. Here, then, as in the Gao you case, the royal performance of

zheng formed part of a wider ritual event that included the conferral of rewards to subordinate

elites.

As noted above, the Gao you inscription does not clarify whether the Chief’s gift of

“servants” that it mentions originated with the Chief himself or with the king. 189 However, that gift came, if not from the king himself, at least as a result of the Chief’s service; it thus further bound both the Chief and his subordinate to the royal house, as Gao recognized and recorded the

Zhou king’s zheng-offering as the context of the Chief’s generosity.190 The king’s allotment of

land to Duan likewise took place through the intermediary Gong Zhi, despite the fact that the

king himself performed the acknowledgement of merits for Duan. Since Duan thanked the king,

rather than Gong Zhi, for the honors conveyed, it appears that Gong Zhi was seen as a

functionary rather than an active agent for the purposes of the transaction. To borrow Latour’s

terms, the king reduced Gong Zhi to service as an intermediary in the Duan gui reward transaction; while the Chief manifestly acted as a mediator in the events of the Gao you inscription, in that he occupied a key role in the network of interpersonal relations formed by the conferral of gifts. 191

189 The above three inscriptions are the most direct sources on the performance of zheng by Western Zhou kings. Two more inscriptions associated with the Zhou king, however, should be accounted for: those of the Fifth-year Hu zhong (358) and the Hu gui (4317), both commonly considered products of the late Western Zhou King Li. The character rendered in JC (AS database) as zheng is virtually illegible in the rubbing included in the collection; I suspect it is rendered as zheng by analogy with the inscription of the Hu gui , as the editors transcribe a character therein, readily identifiable as zheng , in the same manner. However, the use of the character in the Hu gui inscription, in conjunction with xian 憲 does not readily admit its interpretation as a devotional offering (see MWX , 279, n. 6). Drawing on an Erya gloss, MWX offers the simple reading of zheng as mei 美, “beautiful, good”; I am inclined to agree with that interpretation. Understanding the zheng in the Hu gui inscription in that sense then raises the possibility of reading the Fifth-year Hu zhong case, if indeed it is zheng , in the same way. Without further evidence, I see no reason to take the occurrences of zheng in the Hu vessel inscriptions as references to the rite. 190 This case exemplifies the success of the royal house at casting itself as an obligatory passage point, a la Callon, in the interaction model of the Zhou state; on the model of the “obligatory passage point,” see Callon, 203-6. 191 See Latour, Reassembling the Social, 36-40.

154

2.2.3.2.2: Western Zhou vessels cast for the purpose of zheng : non-royal inscriptions

Two further cases of zheng appear in JC inscriptions dating to the second half of the

Western Zhou and declaring the practice as the purpose of vessels produced by non-royal elites. 192 The Taishi Cuo dou 大師豆 (4692) is no longer extant; it is known from its inclusion in Yunqing .193 It can be dated to the late Western Zhou period, however, by connection with the

Taishi Cuo gui (4251-2), reputedly discovered in Xi’an in 1941 and still held by the Palace

Museum, Beijing. 194 The Ji ding 姬鼎 (2681) is also in the collection of the Palace Museum,

Beijing. Its provenance is unknown; however, Zhensong suggests that it was cast as the second half of a two-vessel set, the missing member of which carried the first half of the inscription. 195

The format of its inscription accords well with this idea. Ji was a common surname during the

Western Zhou; when such a surname appears in the inscriptions, it is usually in reference to a woman. 196 This fact, combined with the lack of a verb between the characters Ji 姬 and jiang ,

192 There is a third possible example, that of the Zhonghou gui (3589), dated by JC to the late Western Zhou. JC transcribes its inscription as follows: 侯乍（作）（登）寶 (“The Marquis of Zhong[?] makes a deng precious gui -tureen”). The character rendered deng here is quite close to that rendered as zheng in JC’s Da Yu ding transcription and could feasibly be read as such; however, since the inscription is so brief as to offer no supporting context, I have omitted it from the following analysis and from the master list in the Appendix. 193 Yunqing 3.1. 194 The vertical ribs decorating the Taishi Cuo gui are relatively unusual in Western Zhou bronze décor. Based both on this point and on a consideration of the probably life sequence of figures named in the inscription, Shaughnessy argues for a King Xiao date for the vessel; see Sources , 262-6. For another detailed discussion of the relationship of the Taishi Cuo gui to other bronzes, see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 19, n. 29. Li notes Ma Chengyuan’s dating of the vessel to the reign of King Yi, for which see MWX , 263-4. 195 Zhensong 3.20. The appearance of the Ji ding clearly marks it as a late Western Zhou bronze. Its footed legs, semicircular shape, and band of alternating long and short lozenge decorations are quite close to those of the Maogong ding, on the dating of which see note 285. Meanwhile, the “wave patterns” (bolangwen 波浪紋) on its belly appear on a series of bronzes assigned by Wang, Chen, and Zhang to their ding style 4; of these, the Ji ding is closest in shape to the Han Huangfu ding no. 1 函皇父鼎 (2745), specifically dateable to the late Western Zhou, and probably King Xuan, based on its association with the “August Father.” Indeed, the other Han Huangfu ding, produced by the same figure, is even closer in shape to the Ji ding and the Maogong ding , though it lacks the wave patterns. the style 4 ding series, see Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu, 31-40, esp. 35 (for the phrase bolangwen 波浪紋, see e.g. p. 31); on the “August Father,” see Bureaucracy , 40-1, 90. 196 See the list and discussion of xing 姓 surnames in Appendix 2, table 1.1.

155

suggests that this inscription may have been prefaced by a statement specifying the vessel’s

production by a male on behalf of his female family member X Ji.

Beyond the fact that both vessels were commissioned by ranking elites of non-royal

status for the purpose of zheng -offering, a few points are of note. One is that both are food

vessels; this stands in contrast with the admittedly weak association of zheng with liquor in the

early inscriptions discussed above. 197 Another is that both inscriptions, and the Taishi Cuo dou

inscription in particular, state directly that the zheng in question were to be performed as

devotions to patrilineal ancestors; 198 though this was likely true of the early, royal cases as well, the relevant inscriptions lack evidence to that effect. Yet another is that the Ji ding was almost certainly produced to support the ritual activities of a married woman on behalf of her husband’s patriline, and that zheng was part of those activities. And yet another is that the combination of the terms zheng and chang in the phrase 用 （烝）用嘗 yong zheng yong chang , “therewith to

perform zheng -offering and chang -offering,” is the first occurrence of a formula that sees use in

later inscriptions, as well as of an association that recurs in the later ritual texts. 199

By the late Western Zhou, then, a model of zheng had emerged among non-royal elites that involved the offering of foodstuffs to patrilineal ancestors in association with the pursuit of longevity and other blessings. 200 The provision for these activities in the context of the lineage

197 Since it is now known only from its rubbing in a collection, the vessel type of the Taishi Cuo dou would normally be up for debate; however, the inscription’s identification of its own vessel as a dou -plate is probably reliable. The inscription of the Ji ding adds the grain radical 米 to the character zheng , perhaps to specify its association with food here (see Appendix 2, fig. 2.3) 198 In the case of the Ji ding , this is clear from its appearance in parallel with the terms xiao 孝 and xiang 享. 199 Specifically, the inscriptions of the Chenhou Wu vessels, a group dating to the early Warring States period, employ this formula; see the Chenhou Wu gui 陈侯午簋 (4145), Tenth-year Chenhou Wu gui 十年陈侯午簋 (4648), and Fourteenth-year Chenhou Wu gui 十四年陈侯午簋 (4646-7). On the association of zheng and chang in the ritual texts as part of the “seasonal rites” model, see Zhouli , “Da zong bo,” Shisanjing zhushu, 758-9; “Si zun yi,” 773-4; Liji , “Wang zhi,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1335-6; “Ming tang wei,” 1489-90; “Ji tong,” 1606. 200 Based on the syntax of the relevant inscriptions, I am not comfortable saying that zheng was performed for the purpose of obtaining blessings – only that it was seen as part of a regimen of ritual activity, performed with bronzes, that included those goals. On the idea of chronologically regular devotional activities ( changsi 常祀) as

156

cult was apparently sufficient justification for the creation of an inscribed bronze without

reference to the activities of the royal house. Per the inscription of the Ji ding , the devotional

activity of zheng (as well as that of chang ) could be performed by a married woman, assuming

that she was provided with the necessary tools in the form of ritual bronzes.

2.2.3.2.3: Zheng in received texts of possible Western Zhou date

Compared with the terms previously considered, zheng is well represented in received

texts of possible Western Zhou date. As a term for an offering, it appears in the “Luo gao,”

potentially one of the earlier chapters of the Shangshu, as well as in two of the Shijing songs

classified as “Zhou hymns.” 201

The Shijing poems “Feng nian” and “Zai shan” both describe agricultural activities and

their relationship with the envisioned Zhou social order of which ancestral devotions served as

an organizing motive. As befits its name, the poem “Feng nian” covers only the harvest side of

the equation, celebrating the results thereof. The poem “Zai shan” is much longer; it gives a full

and idealized account of the organized agricultural process, celebrating the rustic virility of the

cultivators and arguing for the antiquity of the agricultural cycle and its concomitant devotional

a classification system for Zhou ritual, see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 47-95, esp. 47-8. It should be noted that the character in the Ji ding inscription that JC glosses as zheng is quite different from the character form in the earlier inscriptions; the grain radical has been transposed to the left-hand side of the vessel radical, and the character form ci 此 added to the top (see table 2.1). In this respect it may be seen as an intermediate form between the earlier examples and later cases such as those in the inscriptions of the Chen Gongzi Shu Yuanfu yan 陳公子叔原父甗 (an early Spring and Autumn vessel, per JC) and the Chenhou Wu gui (a Warring States vessel, per JC). The case in the Taishi Cuo dou inscription, however, is essentially similar to the earlier cases (see table 2.1). Since the Taishi Cuo dou was almost certainly a food vessel and states zheng as its purpose, I am inclined to think that the character used in the Ji ding was meant as an alternate form of zheng contiguous with prior uses, rather than as an effort at composing a new character to indicate food offerings in contrast to a previous model of zheng . 201 On the likely Western Zhou date of the “Luo gao,” see Zhu Fenghan, Xian Qin shi yanjiu gaiyao , 41-2; Shaughnessy, “Shang shu,” in Loewe, Early Chinese Texts, 376-80.

157

activities. The portion of the poem describing the harvest, however, is almost identical to the

corresponding lines in “Feng nian”:

…載穫濟濟、有實其積、萬億及秭。為酒為醴、烝畀祖妣、以洽百禮… …The harvesters flow in, filling their stores, ten thousand, a million, even a billion [grains], Making liquor, making sweet wine, for zheng and giving to ancestors and ancestresses, in accordance with the Hundred Rites… (Zai shan) 202

The poems specify quite clearly that the grains accrued from the harvest will be used to produce

alcohol of various types, that the alcohol will then support the performance of zheng rites to patrilineal ancestors and ancestresses, and that this process is a customary and understood accompaniment of the harvest process. 203 The specified use of liquor for zheng is of note, echoing the association between the two in the relevant early Western Zhou inscriptions. 204 So too is the association of zheng with the harvest; this may have played a role in its

characterization as a seasonal rite in later sources.

The above poems describe zheng as, if not a harvest rite, at least a rite that was performed

after the harvest, once the fruits thereof had been processed into liquor that could be used for

hosting drinking events. They mention no special association with the Zhou royal house; there is

no reason they might not have been used by any Zhou elite household. The relevant passage

from the “Luo gao” offers less detail on zheng itself, but more on its use as one component of a

royal ritual event.

On the face of it, the “Luo gao” narrates the various ceremonies associated with the

establishment of the eastern Zhou capital at Chengzhou during the regency of the Duke of Zhou.

202 For “Feng nian,” see Shisanjing zhushu , p. 594; for “Zai shan,” see 601-2. 203 Both jiu and li also appear as verbs in the Western Zhou inscriptions; see chapter 1. 204 See the brief discussion of the Xiao Yu ding in Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 19.

158

The question of the appropriate role of the king – as a direct governor, or as a ritual head of state

– runs throughout the passage, thanks to its concern with the relationship between King Cheng

and the Duke of Zhou. 205 As such, the narrative contains a number of significant terms relating to Zhou ritual; we will return to the passage repeatedly throughout this work. Here, the relevant portion concerns a series of offerings that King Cheng makes as accompaniment to his assignment of the Duke of Zhou to handle affairs at Chengzhou in the king’s absence: 206

戊辰，王在新邑，烝祭歲。文王騂牛一，武王騂牛一。王命作冊。逸祝冊，惟告周公其後。王賓，殺、禋，咸格，王入太室祼。王命周公後，作冊，逸誥。在十有二月，惟周公誕保文武受命、惟七年。 On the wuchen day, at the New City ( Xinyi ), the king performed zheng -sacrifice 烝.207 He offered one red ox to King Wen and one red ox to King Wu in sui -offering. The king ordered Document Maker Yi to perform an invocation ( zhu 祝) with documents, announcing that the Duke of Zhou would remain behind. 208 The king acted as [ritual] guest; he killed (the sacrificial victim) ( sha 殺). When the offering was complete, he entered.209 The king entered the Great Hall ( Taishi 太室) and performed guan -libation. The king commanded the Duke of Zhou to remain behind; Document Maker Yi made the announcement. 210 It was the twelfth month, when Dan, the Duke of Zhou, preserved the command received by Kings Wen and Wu; it was the seventh year. 211

205 Legge, The Shoo King, 433. 206 Shangshu, “Luo gao,” in Shisanjing zhushu, 214-7, esp. 217. The excerpt follows the CHANT database edition, except where specified. 207 I have altered the punctuation to break this clause between ji 祭 and sui 歲 rather than between sui and wen 文, as the CHANT edition does. 208 I do not observe the break inserted by CHANT between Zuoce , the common title “Document Maker,” and yi 逸; I hold this to be the compound name “Document Maker Yi.” On the title of Document Maker, see Bureaucracy , pp. 310-11, and Zhang Yachu and Liu Yu, Xi Zhou jinwen guanzhi yanjiu , Beijing: Zhonghua, 1986, 34-6. With respect to the meaning of hou 後 here, I follow Legge in taking it as referring to the following contents of the passage, i.e., to the king’s leaving the Duke of Zhou behind at Chengzhou. See Legge, The Shoo King , 444-5, 451-2. 209 My sense is that xian 咸 and ge 格 are independent of each other and that the passage uses ge 格 and ru 入 to describe the king’s entry into the overall compound and the Great Hall, respectively. The change does not substantially affect the meaning of the passage. On my reading of yin 禋 as “offering” in a general sense, see the section devoted to that term below. 210 See the above note on Document Maker Yi (208). 211 Dan 誕 here is probably a substitution for dan 旦, the personal name of the Duke of Zhou. This line indicates that the above events (i.e., the ceremonies that close out the chapter) occurred during the twelfth month of the seventh year of the Duke of Zhou’s regency.

159

The king’s zheng accompanied but was not equivalent to his sui -offering 歲, in which he offered

one red ox each to both his father and grandfather. These rites, as well as the king’s performance

of an offering called yin 禋, apparently took place outside the complex containing the Great Hall

(Taishi 太室), presumably because, as the passage specifies, the ritual sequence involved the king personally killing the sacrificial victims. 212 Along with them, an official with the title

“Document Maker” ( Zuoce 作冊) performed, at the king’s behest, an invocation with documents; potentially relating to the king’s upcoming command to the Duke of Zhou. 213 Their performance finished, the king proceeded inside to perform guan -libation and issue the official announcement, through the intermediary Document Maker Yi, that the Duke of Zhou would remain behind in

Chengzhou.

By now it should come as no surprise that the individual offering zheng was here characterized as one component of an extended ritual sequence performed by an early Western

Zhou king. As we have seen, many of the surviving accounts of Zhou ritual are of this sort; chapter 4 of this work will explore the implications of this fact in greater detail. With respect to the characterization of zheng itself, the notable points here are that the king performed it outside,

or at least outside the compound containing the Great Hall; that it happened in conjunction with

an accompanying livestock sacrifice, here designated sui ; and, in particular, that it happened

during the seventh month -- near, if not at, the time of the harvest.

212 See the corresponding sections of this chapter for more on sui 歲 and yin 禋. 213 There is room to speculate as to whether attendees might have seen a distinction between two separate events: one consisting of the zheng and sui offerings and an invocation by Document Maker Yi at the king’s behest; and a second comprising the king’s ritual guesthood, the yin -offering, the guan -libation, and the announcement of the king’s command to the Duke of Zhou. The grammar of the passage accommodates but does not require the reading of a break between the characters ce 冊 and wei 惟. Since a separate date is not given for the second grouping of ritual actions, however, and since the king’s “killing” might reasonably refer to the oxen mentioned as part of the sui offering, I am inclined to read the entire sequence as a single extended event.

160

2.2.3.2.4: Summary

Like most of the terms considered here, the term zheng/deng came to the Zhou from the

Shang, among whom it designated a practice that included the offering of either foodstuffs or liquor to ancestors, but may also have involved the mustering of troops or large groups of personnel. 214 Based on inscriptional evidence, it seems that a practice designated by the

character persisted throughout the Western Zhou period. Early Western Zhou inscriptions record

only cases of zheng carried out by the Zhou king; the two specific cases captured in the early

Western Zhou inscriptions were part of major prestation events involving multi-tiered bonds of

patronage. As of the late Western Zhou, inscriptions emerge that, rather than recording specific

cases of zheng, note the production of the bronzes bearing them by non-royal elites for the

express purpose of zheng . By the late Western Zhou at the latest, then, the practice of the zheng -

offering had spread amongst other portions of the aristocratic populace, and attitudes toward

ancestral-ritual practices had come to admit the production of inscribed bronzes for the purpose

of zheng , without the need for direct reference to the activities of the Zhou kings.

The concrete nature of the zheng offering is still a point of contention. Liu Yu notes the

use of the term in the polemical warning of the Da Yu ding inscription, which suggests that the

early Western Zhou practice of the rite involved the offering of liquor. 215 The Gao you, too, records that a royal zheng-offering took place in conjunction with a drinking event. The use of the term in certain “Zhou song” poems substantiates its association with liquor, as does the existence of earlier Shang oracle bone inscriptions stipulating the zheng/deng -offering of

214 For a potential example of this use, see bone H39864. 215 Liu Yu, Jinwen zhong , 512.

161

liquor. 216 However, by the late Western Zhou, multiple food vessels record their production for

the purpose of zheng ; in the understanding of their commissioners, zheng must have admitted, if not required, the offering of foodstuffs. Given that alcohol is produced from grain, it is likely that zheng was conceived of generally as the offering and enjoyment of the fruits of the harvest in both their processed and unprocessed forms.

The “Zhou song” poems seen above characterize zheng as a ritual endpoint for the harvest, when organized agricultural activity produced grain that was distilled into alcohol for offering to ancestral spirits. The two specific cases of zheng recorded in the early Western Zhou inscriptions took place in the eleventh and twelfth months, firmly in the winter range, and so would have relied on stored foodstuffs as provisions; assuming that they included offerings of alcohol, the timing likely accommodated the delay necessary for the maturation of liquor produced with the newly harvested grain. In later, received sources on Zhou ritual that enumerate an official sequence of rites corresponding with the four seasons, the declared spring and summer rites vary; zheng , however, is consistently assigned to the winter. The longevity of

zheng ’s seasonal associations was likely due to its close association with the harvest, a phenomenon fundamentally dependent on the natural cycle. 217

2.2.3.3: Zhu 祝 (invocation) 218

2.2.3.3.1: Zhu 祝 in the Western Zhou inscriptions

216 Liu Yuan notes this in Jizuli , 58, citing Yao Xiaosui, ed., Yinxu jiagu keci leizuan , Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989, 366- 7. 217 In contrast with rites such as di 禘, which, though sometimes listed as a seasonal rite, had no discernible association with the summer; see the seasonal rite models cited in note 274. 218 The Shuowen defines zhu 祝 as “when the master of a ritual speaks words of praise”; see Shuowen , 6. Two important pieces of received textual evidence support the understanding of zhu in this sense in the Western Zhou sources; on these see below.

162

Inscriptions ranging in date from early to late Western Zhou make reference to the

practice of zhu 祝, or “invocation.” Most such inscriptions refer to the “Invoker,” an official position that persisted, in various locations and at various levels of the institutional hierarchy, throughout the Western Zhou period. 219 In the early Western Zhou inscriptions, however, the term zhu 祝 appears twice as an active verb that, based on its use in received texts, probably

refers to the process of speaking or reading formulaic utterances aloud – i.e., “invocation” – as

part of the performance of ritual. 220 One of these appearances is in the Xiao Yu ding inscription;

though the syntax is somewhat irregular due to lacunae, it is clear that the king, as part of the

ritual events following Yu’s victory celebration, personally performed an invocation. 221 The second is the Qin gui inscription, almost certainly dating to the reign of King Cheng and famous because it records activities of the Duke of Zhou and his eldest son, Qin: 222

王伐 （蓋）侯，周公某（謀），禽祝，禽又（有）祝，王易（賜）金百寽（鋝），禽用乍（作）寶彝。 The king attacked the Marquis of Gai. The Duke of Zhou did the planning. Qin performed an invocation ( zhu ). Qin also had a full-vessel invocation. 223 The king presented [Qin] with one hundred lue of metal. Qin uses it to make a precious vessel.

219 On the office of Invoker, see Bureaucracy , 311. 220 Despite its extreme commonality in later materials, zhu 祝 occurs only twice in received texts of likely Western Zhou date. One of these occurrences is in the final passage of the “Luo gao” chapter of the Shangshu , translated above in the discussion of zheng . There, during the series of offerings he performs before departing, King Cheng orders Document Maker Yi ( Zuoce Yi 作冊逸) to perform an invocation with documents ( ce 冊) relating to the Duke of Zhou’s subsequent assignment. A further potential occurrence of zhu appears in the “Ke Yin” chapter of the Yizhoushu , a section of possible Western Zhou date (see Zhu Fenghan, Xian Qin shi yanjiu gaiyao , 42-3). There it serves as part of the title “Temple Invoker” ( zongzhu 宗祝), a figure whom the leader of the Zhou orders to honor important guests and conduct prayers among the Zhou troops after the conquest of Shang (Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu , 182-3; note that the standard text prints the character as si 祀 rather than zhu 祝; however, both Huang and the CHANT database edition [on which see http://www.chant.org/] correct this to zhu 祝). Both of these cases are consistent with an understanding of zhu 祝 as “invocation.” The later ritual texts offer a bit of weak corroboration in that they mention a zongzhu ; see Zhouli , “Yu ren,” Shisanjing zhushu , 923; Liji , “Li yun,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1425-6. 221 See the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839), generally dated to the reign of King Kang (see note 169). 222 On the identity of Qin, referred to as Bo Qin, see Shiji , p. 1518. 223 The translation follows Ma’s suggested reading of the character ; see MWX 27, 18, n. 3.

163

Here Qin’s invocation is part of the preparations for the king’s campaign, the ritual counterpart

to his father’s planning. It is tempting to see the division of preparatory responsibilities between

the Duke of Zhou and Qin in relation to the Duke’s controversial domination of the Western

Zhou government during King Cheng’s earlier years, as stipulated by the classic historical

narrative. 224 Indeed, Qin was not involved in this single event by chance; he held the official title of “Grand Invoker” ( Dazhu 大祝), as we know from the inscription of the Dazhu Qin ding

大祝禽鼎 (1937-8).

No further cases of invocation appear in the inscriptions. However, an additional three inscriptions commemorate the appointment of Zhou elites as either Invokers or assistants to

Invokers. The Shen guigai (4267), a middle Western Zhou vessel, records Shen’s appointment

to assist the Grand Invoker; since his responsibilities in this regard included supervision of a

different group of Invokers known as the Invokers of the Nine Xi ( jiu xi zhu 九祝), we can

reasonably assume that Shen himself carried the title of Invoker as well. 225 Notably, the

inscription specifies that Shen is to succeed his father and grandfathers in this service, suggesting

that Shen’s lineage had a semi-hereditary assignation as Invokers, albeit one that required the

king’s confirmation. The inscription of the Chang Xin he (9455), another middle Western Zhou

vessel, substantiates the continued existence of the office of Grand Invoker with its description

of that official’s participation in a formal archery competition; given that the Grand Invoker was

paired with the Elder of Jing ( Jingbo ) in that event, it stands to reason that his status at the Zhou

court was quite high. 226 Finally, the Qian gui (4296-7), a late Western Zhou vessel,

224 See Shiji , 1518-20. Shaughnessy summarizes these affairs in “Western Zhou History,” 310-7. 225 MWX identifies this term simply as a “conferred settlement” ( caiyi 采邑); see MWX , 161, n. 1. Li Feng identifies the character as xi 戲 and reads it as referring to military camps; see Bureaucracy , 77-9. 226 The Elder of Jing (Jingbo) was an influential figure of the middle Western Zhou period; for a discussion of his role in the relative dating of bronzes, see Shaughnessy, Sources, 116-20. The Chang Xin he dates to the reign of

164

commemorates the king’s extension of its commissioner Qian’s appointment as Invoker for the

Five Cities; the beginning portion of the inscription specifically refers to Qian as “Invoker

Qian.” 227

By the middle to late Western Zhou period, then, the office of Invoker had developed both an internal hierarchy of ranks and hereditary associations with particular lineages.

Inscriptions from this period fail to record any specific examples of invocation as a practice.

This was in keeping with overall trends in the content of inscriptions. However, given that the dedicated vocation of Invoker, and in particular the royally mediated office of Grand Invoker, continued to exist, the complete lack of cases of invocation suggests that the office may have shifted focus over the course of the period, moving away from ritual management in favor of other administrative or courtly duties.

2.2.3.3.2: Summary

In the early Western Zhou as in the late Shang, the king could and did perform zhu - invocation, but he also could and did appoint official representatives to do so. 228 The early

King Mu; see Sources , 110-1. 227 The Qian gui are known from their depictions in Kaogutu 3.9-10. With their three raised feet and horizontal ribbing beneath a narrow band of ornamentation, they can unproblematically be dated to the late Western Zhou; compare, for example, the two Zhong Youfu gui 中友父簋 (3755-6) from a cache in Qijiacun, pictured in detail in Zhouyuan , 29. This décor is the essence of what Shaughnessy calls “Gui Style IV,” dating to Kings Yi, Li, and Xuan; see Sources , 130-2. 228 The Shang oracle bones record several clear cases of divination about royal invocations to the ancestors; see for example H01076.r.1, H02331, H19806, etc. The term zhu also appears on a number of Shang oracle bones in the position normally reserved for the diviner of record; see for example H23712, H23713, H23717, etc. Based on their punctuation (i.e., on the placement of a comma between zhu 祝 and zhen 貞), it seems that the CHANT editors see the zhu in these examples as a verb indicating that invocation formed a part of the divination process. It is simpler, I think, to read the zhu in these cases as the name or title of the diviner. It is conceivable that this individual happened to have the personal name Zhu; however, given that zhu indicated a type of official assignment throughout the Western Zhou period and that the Zhou adopted certain official titles such as Zuoce ( on which see Bureaucracy , Appendix 1, 310-11; Zhang Yachu and Liu Yu, Xi Zhou guanzhi yanjiu , 34-6) from the Shang, it seems at least possible that the zhu referred to as the source of many divination records was a Shang elite who bore the title of Invoker.

165

Western Zhou kings already maintained dedicated personnel for the purpose of invocations.

Middle and late Western Zhou inscriptions attest to a significant expansion of those personnel.

The title of Grand Invoker survived into the middle Western Zhou at least, and a number of

lesser offices had been created as well. Some of these were known simply as “Invoker,” while

others, such as “Invoker of the Five Cities” and “the Invokers of the Nine Military Camps,” were

identified with specific locations, extending the royal ritual model across the Zhou cultural

sphere.

Post-early-Western Zhou inscriptions contain no reference at all to specific instances of

zhu . Judging, however, from the frequent and detailed references to zhu in a variety of received

texts dating of dates ranging across the Eastern Zhou and Han periods, we can safely say that the

practice of zhu -invocation achieved substantial penetration throughout the Zhou cultural sphere

and that zhu , as invocation, survived and thrived throughout the rest of the pre-Qin period. 229

The expansion of officially designated Invokers was thus probably part accompanied by the

continued practice of invocation throughout the Western Zhou state. The lack of references to

specific invocations in middle and late inscriptions reflects not an overall waning of the practice,

but changes in the royal practice of ritual and its relationship to the cultural institution of

inscribed bronze casting.

2.3: Ancestral rituals performed only by Zhou kings

Though the situation is unusual, there are two ritual acts in the Western Zhou

inscriptional record that are only performed by Zhou kings, both associated with the management

229 Zhu appears several times in later portions of the Shangshu and the Shijing , and two later chapters of the Yizhoushu purport specifically to record historically important invocations of the Shang and Zhou periods; see for example Shangshu , “Jin teng,” Shisanjing zhushu , 196; Mao shi , “Chu ci,” Shisanjing zhushu , 468; Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu , 412-24. It is particularly prevalent in the Sanli , however, appearing more than 80 times in the Yili alone, with double-digit occurrences in the Zhouli and Liji as well, per the CHANT database concordances.

166

of the Shang-remnant population. The following section will consider these with a view toward

characterizing their role in the ritual program of the Zhou royal house.

2.3.1: Su ( )230 (AS glosses as 餗)

2.3.1.1: Su in inscriptions

A relevant but problematic term appears in the inscription of the X Shi zun 士尊

(5985):231

丁巳，王才（在）新邑，初  232 （餗），王易（賜） 士鄉貝朋，用乍（作）父 233 戊 彝。〔子〕。 On the dingsi day, the king was at the New City and first performed su . The king gave X Shi Qing a string of cowries, with which [Qing] makes a revered vessel for Father Wu. (Clan mark).

The character that denotes the royal activity occasioning X Shi Qing’s gift appears only this once in the entire corpus of bronze inscriptions. No Shuowen entry exists to hint at its concrete

230 This image is taken from the Academia Sinica database’s transcription of the relevant vessel inscription, reprinted below. 231 The X Shi Qing zun was reportedly found at Luoyang; see Zhensong 7.18.1. Shirakawa 7.27, 321, assigns it to the earliest stages of the Western Zhou period, and Duandai, 65, similarly dates it to King Cheng. Citing Chen, Shirakawa observes that vessels employing the term Xinyi 新邑 rather than the term Chengzhou to refer to that site seem to trend earlier in date. The site may not have been called Chengzhou, Shirakawa suggests, until its completion (as implied by the name Chengzhou , or “Completion of Zhou”). See Shirakawa 7.27, 318-9; for Chen Mengjia’s discussion of the use of the name Xinyi vs. Chengzhou 成周 as a method of dating, see Duandai , 64-5. This would indicate that the X Shi zun does indeed date to the period of Chengzhou’s initial construction, and the instance of su 餗 mentioned in its inscription would thus have occurred in the context of the early establishment of Zhou royal authority over the recently composed Luo river valley community. For a general summary of the establishment of Chengzhou and the various regional states during the early Western Zhou period, see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 311-7; for a more detailed consideration of the sociopolitical circumstances surrounding the construction of Chengzhou, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 62-6. On Xinyi, see Chen Gongrou, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de Xinyi Chengzhou yu Wangcheng,” in Qingzhu Su Binqi xiansheng kaogu wushiwu nian lunwenji, Beijing: Wenwu, 1989, 386–97. 232 I have replaced the AS database transcription of the character with this one, prepared based on the following discussion. 233 The second portion of this clan mark does not appear in the AS database.

167

meaning. 234 MWX suggests that it may mean something along the lines of kui 餽, “to give food as a gift,” or gui 歸, “return, give back to,” presumably based on the character’s left-hand element; Shirakawa notes this possibility as well. 235 The AS database, on the other hand, glosses the character as su 餗.236

Without more examples from the inscriptions, the character cannot be definitively identified. I am inclined, however, to suspect that the character was indeed intended as su 餗.

The Jiaguwenzi gulin identifies a number of variants of the su character in the oracle bones, all,

according to the editors, used as rite names (fig. 2.5, Appendix 2). 237 Most of the components making up the X Shi zun character appear in one or another of the characters cited in JGWZGL .

The right-hand component, a shu 束.with an added you 又, is essentially similar to that of OBI character 3207. 238 The lower-left-hand components of zhi 止 and gong 工 could easily have been derived from the wang 往 component (JGWZGL 837) making up the right-hand side of

OBI character 3206 and simplified and placed in the lower left of character 3207. The upper- right-hand portion of the X Shi zun character is problematic, as it seems clearly to contain the

element (JGWZGL 3001) (JWGL 1806). A scribe dealing with an unfamiliar character,

however, could easily convert the ( mian 宀 + dou 豆) element of the left-hand portion of 3209.4 into guan 官. The presence of the zhi 止 element below making up the top portion of wang 往 might have encouraged that parsing of the character, by analogy with zhui 追 (JGWZGL 3004)

234 MWX 128, 87-8, n. 1. 235 MWX 128, 87-8, n. 1; Shirakawa 1.7, 320. 236 JC 5985. This identification appears in the AS database version. It bears noting that the CHANT database version of this inscription leaves the character unidentified, but glosses a character from the inscription of the Yin Guang ding 尹光鼎 (2709) as su 餗; in the Academia Sinica version, the situations are reversed. 237 See JGWZGL, 3206-9, 3226-9. 238 See JGWZGL , 3226-7.

168

(JWGL 198, from the Ze fangyi [9901]). This in turn would encourage the scribe, assuming

that the zhi 止 element went with what was above rather than under it, to approach the bottom- left component as a separate character, here a gong 工, rather than as the bottom part of wang

往.239

Assuming that the variants above indeed represent the same word, the character su 餗 seems to have admitted the use of either the shi 食 or you 酉 radicals. 240 I suspect, then, that the

character in the X Shi zun inscription was intended as a version of su after the model of 3207, but

substituting the dou -plate with lid radical of 3209.4 for the you -urn radical of the former

character. Interpreting the middle of the left-hand-side as zhui 追, the scribe then detached the bottom-left portion of the character, part of the wang 往 element as seen in 3207, into a free- standing gong 工. The intended character, then, would have referred to a rite, as is typical of su in the oracle bone inscriptions. 241 This fits well with the syntax of the X Shi zun inscription.

2.3.1.2: Su in received texts of possible Western Zhou date

The problem remains, however, of what precisely the ceremonial activity su entailed.

The OBI give little evidence beyond the likelihood, based on the character forms, that it involved an offering of vegetable matter or liquor. 242 Received texts are of little help as well; the earliest

239 Yu Xingwu and Yao Xiaosui approach the gong element as a separate character; see the discussion in Shirakawa, Kinbun tsuushaku , 319. It is of note that the formulation of the character wang 往 seen in 3206 and 3207 caused scribal problems from a very early point. JGWZGL notes that alternate forms of the character substituted a tu 土 for the phonetic component wang 王 and that the small seal script form of the character combined zhi 之 and tu; see JGWZGL , 834. The shape of the bottom of wang 往 seems to have lent itself easily to misinterpretation. 240 JGWZGL , 3228. 241 See JGWZGL, 3206-9, 3226-9. 242 For the viewpoint that the rite may have involved the offering of vegetables, see JGWZGL , 3229 (3209 entry).

169

use of the term, and the source of many later references, 243 is in a line from the Zhouyi:

九四：鼎折足，覆公餗，其形渥 [剭]，凶 94: The cauldron’s broken leg overturns the duke’s stew ( su ); his punishment is execution. Inauspicious.

《象》曰：「覆公餗」、信如何也。 The Images say: “’[It] overturns the duke’s stew ( su )’ means “’to trust how it is.’” (Zhouyi , “Ding,” no. 50) 244

Yijing line-statements are notoriously difficult to interpret, but it seems clear that the term su in

this line referred to a foodstuff of some sort. The fact that the line associates su with a ding -

cauldron 鼎, a Shang and Zhou bronze ancestral-ritual vessel type that would eventually become associated with the well-being of the state in general, lends circumstantial support to the idea that su referred to a food offering. 245 Such an interpretation would help explain why the overturning

of a cauldron would be inauspicious enough to warrant execution, as per Shaughnessy’s reading

of the line.

2.3.1.3: Summary

In the X Shi Qing zun inscription, the su 餗 food-offering provided a venue for the

demonstration of royal power, the strengthening of personal bonds with local power-holders, and,

perhaps most important, the distribution of largesse in a politically sensitive context. The king

awarded cowries to X Shi Qing, who, judging from the inscription’s use of a Shang-style clan

243 Including, for example, Hanshu , “Xu zhuan,” in Ban Gu, author, Wang Xianqian, ed., Hanshu buzhu , Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983, 1730; Su Yu, Chunqiu fanlu yi zheng , Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992, “Jing hua,” 97. 244 See Zhouyi zhengyi in Shisanjing zhushu , Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982, 61. The translation follows Shaughnessy’s in Shaughnessy, “The Composition of the Zhouyi, ” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1983, 177-82. The alternate characters offered in the transcription are Shaughnessy’s suggestions. 245 On the conceptual connection between ding and the state, see Chang, Art, Myth, and Ritual , 95-100. Ding were one of the most frequently inscribed vessel types; of the approximately 6000 inscribed vessels of Western Zhou date in the Academia Sinica JC database, about 1100 of them are ding .

170

mark and the use of the ganzhi name “Father Wu” ( Fu Wu 父戊) to refer to Qing’s father, was probably of Shang heritage. 246 The award may have been intended to support or repay his

participation in the construction and maintenance of the “New City” of Chengzhou, new home to

the relocated Shang remnants; 247 alternatively, it may simply have been meant to strengthen the bonds between the Zhou kings and X Shi Qing and his lineage. 248

Either way, the performance of a su food-offering created a pretext for the award that

situated it in a context of royal authority and religious privilege familiar from the practices of the

Shang royal house, while at the same time fitting within the developing Zhou framework of

association between provision of hospitality, royal ritual, and prestige distribution. 249 Such a

situation would have been ideal in the context of the construction of Chengzhou, when it was in

the interest of the Zhou royal house to take the path of least resistance in marshaling the labor

resources of the Shang remnant populations. While the lack of further references to su 餗 in the

bronze inscriptions may simply reflect the patchiness of the sources, it bears considering whether

the Zhou kings might have abandoned the term and, possibly, the practice once the infrastructure

246 On ganzhi cult names, see Keightley, The Ancestral Landscape, 33-5, and Allan, The Shape of the Turtle , 19-56; on clan marks, see Gao Ming, Guwenzi leibian, Beijing: Zhonghua, 1982, cited in Boltz, “Language and Writing,” in Cambridge History , 113-4. Note also that the X Shi Qing zun was reportedly recovered at Luoyang, suggesting that Qing’s family lived there. 247 The “Shao gao” describes a marshaling of local human resources to build Chengzhou, some of whom were identified as “the people of Yin” ( Yin shu 殷庶), in keeping with the tradition that the remnant population of Shang was relocated to the Luo river valley. See “Shao gao,” Shisanjing zhushu, 211; Legge, 424; Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 133-4; Nienhauser, ed., 65. In general, the “Shao gao” is concerned with the control and management of the remnant Shang populations in the context of the building of Chengzhou and the succession of King Cheng. In the wake of the first major conflict over the royal succession and the combined rebellion of the Overseers and the leader of the remaining Shang populace, this task cannot have been simple; for a summary of the situation, see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 310-1. 248 This early in the Western Zhou, at least, Cook suggests that cowries may have been an inalienable good in Weiner’s sense – that is to say, a non-transferable medium of prestige distribution rather than a spendable commodity – though she notes the possibility of their use as a standard of exchange as well. See Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” 262-5. Cook also points out that Shang bronzes record no gifts other than cowries (p. 260). 249 The associations between hospitality, feasting, ancestral ritual, gift-giving, and prestige distribution have been discussed in the previous chapter and will be described further in the next section of this chapter.

171

of their state and their control over the remnants of the Shang was better established.

2.3.2: Yue 禴

2.3.2.1: Yue in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions

Yue 禴 is difficult to assess. Its base form yue 龠 appears in the bronze inscriptions in

contexts associated with music, wherein it is often read as yue 籥, “pipes,” or he 龢, a term

associated with the tonal properties of bells. 250 In one case, however, it unambiguously refers to

the Zhou king’s performance of a major ceremony. That case is the inscription shared by the Shi

Shang you 士上卣 (5421-2), Shi Shang zun 士上尊 (5999), and Shi Shang he 士上盉 (9454), a

set of early Western Zhou vessels associated with the Zhou settlement at Luoyang: 251

隹（唯）王大龠（禴）于宗周，京年，才（在）五月既朢（望）辛酉，王令士上眔史寅（殷）于成周， 百生（姓）豚，眔賞卣、鬯、貝，用乍（作）父癸寶彝。〔臣辰冊侁〕。 It was the year when the king performed a great yue -rite at Zongzhou and then gave feasting at Pangjing. In the fifth month, during the jiwang moon phase, on the xinyou day, the king ordered Shi Shang and Scribe Yin to attend an audience at Chengzhou and to give the Hundred Surnames suckling pigs; 252 [the king] also awarded [Shi Shang] a you - urn of dark liquor and cowries. [Shi Shang] therewith makes a precious and revered vessel for Father Gui. [Clan mark.]

250 See for example the JC (AS) transcriptions of the inscriptions of the Zhe Jian zhong 者減鐘 (196-8), an early Spring and Autumn bell set, and the Ke ding 克鼎 (2836), a late Western Zhou vessel; as well as MWX 534, 363, and MWX 297, 215-7, esp. 217, n. 21, for the relevant readings. Some Western Zhou inscriptions, including those of the Liang Qi zhong 梁其鐘 (187-92) and the Xing zhong 鐘 (246, 253), contain a character , which JC (AS) glosses as a compound of yue 龠 and li 力. Ma glosses this character as yue/le 樂; see MWX, pp. 273-4; 194-5, no. 3. On he 龢 as a description for bells, see Lothar von Falkenhausen, Suspended Music: Chime-bells in the Culture of Bronze Age China , Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993, 41-3; in his translation of the Xing zhong inscription, von Falkenhausen renders the term 龢 as “harmonically.” 251 MWX situates these as part of a complex of inscriptions, including those of the Xiaochen Zhuan gui (4206) and the Zuoce Xi you 作冊卣 (5400), mentioning a major royal audience hosted at Chengzhou, which he dates to the reign of King Zhao; see MWX 115-8, 80-3. Duandai dates the Shi Shang vessels to King Cheng; see Duandai 21, 41-3. The vessels were reportedly unearthed at Mapo, Luoyang, Henan, in 1929; see JC (AS). 252 I follow MWX ’s reading of this line in the translation; see MWX , 81-2. For Ma’s explanation of yin 殷 as jin 覲, “to have audience,” see MWX 115 (Zuoce Xi you 作冊卣), 80, n. 1b.

172

The syntax of the first portion is comparable to that of the He zun (6014), discussed previously;

the events of the inscription were not demonstrably associated with the rite, but draw on it as a

marker of the year. Liu Yu holds this inscription forth as evidence that yue 禴 was an important

ancestral rite of some sort, based on its appearance in conjunction with wan/xiang (夗 + 食) as a

year-marker. 253 The latter, he suggests, can be identified as a specific rite commemorating the accession of a new ancestor to the patriline based on the pattern of its use as a year marker in the inscriptions. 254 That is a stretch; but the fact that this yue rite was considered important enough

to mark a year puts it in a very small group of ceremonies that serve that function, including da

feng/li 大豐 and hui ȼ.255

2.3.2.2: Yue in received texts of possible Western Zhou date

Yue also appears frequently in received texts, including some of likely Western Zhou date.

Most notable for the present purposes is its appearance in two lines of the Zhushu jinian . The

“New Text” edition thereof contains the following line in the entry for the last Shang king, Di

Xin:

六年，西伯初禴于畢。 In the sixth year, the Earl of the West first performed the yue -rite at Bi. 256

The place called Bi 畢 listed here as the site of the rite is traditionally known as the resting place of the first few Zhou rulers; Li Feng has recently shown that it referred in the bronzes to a

253 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 511. 254 Ibid., 502-3. The question of wan/xiang ’s nature will be addressed further in the following section. 255 Feng/li appears as a year-marker in the He zun (6014) inscription; hui does so in the inscription of the recently discovered Shu Ze fangding (on which see Li Boqian, “Shu Ze fangding mingwen kaoshi”). 256 Bamboo Annals , Di Xin, 6 th year, 139. Liu Yu has observed the term’s appearance in the Zhushu jinian ; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,”, 511. For the use of the name “the Western Earl” to refer to King Wen before his break with the Shang, see Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 116.

173

division of the holdings of the Western Zhou royal house, likely near the city of Hao. 257 Here, then, we have an unusual example of the performance of a rite 1) associated with the Shang royal house 2) by King Wen 3) in the Zhou heartland 4) before the conquest of Shang was accomplished. This rare piece of evidence recalls the assertion, made in the “Wei qing” and the

“Wo jiang” poems in the “Zhou song” section of the Shijing, that King Wen was responsible for the establishment of ritual standards for the Zhou state – an assertion that contrasts with the traditional view that the Duke of Zhou laid down the rules for Zhou ritual. 258

Yue also features in no less than three Zhouyi line statements. Two simply advise the suitability of the yue -rite; little is to be gleaned from these other than as additional evidence suggesting the antiquity of the term. 259 The third contrasts the yue -offering with a theoretical different ceremony for which it would be an appropriate substitute:

九五：東鄰殺牛，不如西鄰之禴祭實受其福。 9.5: Killing an ox in the eastern neighborhood is inferior to making a yue -offering in the western neighborhood, [which] truly receives its good fortune (allotment of meat?). (Section 63, “Already Crossed”) 260

Liu Yu suggests that the yue rite specifically did not involve an animal sacrifice, based on its use in contrast with the killing of an ox in this passage. 261 I would suggest that the clearer point of

contrast in the line is the association of yue with the western direction as opposed to the eastern direction of the hypothetical ox slaughter. Liu’s interpretation is plausible, but it is just as possible that yue was simply used as another term also referring to an animal offering. The most that can be said without reservation is that, in at least one situation, the authors of the line

257 On both these points, see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 151-2 and n. 3. 258 See Mao shi, “Wei qing,” Shisanjing zhushu, 584; “Wo jiang,” 588. On the tradition of the Duke of Zhou as author of the Zhouli and, by implication, of the ritual practices of the Zhou state, see William G. Boltz, “Chou li,” in ECT , 26-7. 259 These are in section 45, “Gathering,” and section 46, “Ascending.” See Shisanjing zhushu , 58. 260 Shisanjing zhushu, 72. 261 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 511.

174

statement considered the yue offering to be at least equivalent in effectiveness to the offering of

an ox.

2.3.2.3: Summary

Though rare in the bronzes, the ceremony known as yue 禴 is common in the oracle

bones, but the terseness of the bone inscriptions limits their usefulness. 262 It often appears

together with the term , sometimes read as sai ; with , generally read as bin 賓; and/or with

彡, the base form of rong 肜.263 From this we can gauge at least that it was a frequent part of royal ancestral-ritual activities under the Shang, usually in conjunction with other rites. 264 Per

the Bamboo Annals , it was adopted and performed in the Zhou heartland by King Wen as early

as the reign of the last Shang king, Di Xin. The inscriptions of the Shi Shang bronzes confirm

that least one of the early Western Zhou kings then conducted it in the post-conquest period.

This event was unusual enough to merit its use as a year-marker in a bronze inscription. Since

the inscriptions do not directly discuss the yue rite in question, however, there is little to be

gleaned about it apart from the fact that it was performed by the king at Zongzhou .

The audience described in the Shi Shang vessel inscription was not necessarily associated

262 The base character yue 龠 appears on 46 bones in the CHANT OBI database. The surrounding syntax makes it clear that it is used to indicate a rite in many of these occurrences. See also JGWZGL , 751-3, 733-9. 263 JGWZGL 1122, 2066, and 3327, respectively; the first two images follow JGWZGL, pp. 1065, 2023. On the reading of the former term as sai , see JGWZGL 1122, 1065-71; Yu Xingwu, “Shi ,” in Jiaguwenzi shilin, Beijing: Zhonghua, 1979, 36, cited in Liu Yu,”Jinwen zhong,” 506. Inscriptions H22882, H23079, H23112, etc. contain all four of these terms. Yue 龠 appears in at least one case to have been a place name as well; see H04720, in which the taking of jade from yue 龠 is ordered. 264 Of the OBI containing the term that state an object of the offerings, nearly all refer to a Shang royal ancestor rather than a natural force; see for example H23241, H27178, H41003, retrieved from CHANT. Liu Yu observes the term’s use as an ancestral rite in the OBI as well; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 511. One possible exception (H24883) contains the phrase bu gou yu 不冓雨. This may or may not refer to the object of the yue rite, as gou can serve as a rite name in and of itself; see Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi , 112.

175

with the king’s hosting of the yue rite. 265 If it was, though, the rite provided an opportunity for

the king to demand an audience with subordinate elites Shi Shang and Scribe Yin, wherein,

according to Ma’s interpretation, he called upon them to distribute suckling pigs ( tun 豚) – a frequent sacrificial offering under the Shang– to the Hundred Surnames ( baixing 百姓). 266

Given the location of the event, the association of the vessels with Luoyang, and the fact that the

commissioner’s deceased father is assigned the funereal name Father Gui ( Fu Gui 父癸), it is likely that Shi Shang and Scribe Yin were of Shang heritage. 267 The king’s command concerning the distribution of suckling pigs may then be seen as a royal employment of local intermediaries to ensure the provisioning of local elites, many of whom were also of Shang descent, 268 for the continuation of offerings carried out under the Shang kings; 269 alternatively,

the king might have been providing largesse that was expected after the performance of a major

ceremony.

Either way, the king’s provision of suckling pigs suggests an effort to maintain the

commitment of Chengzhou-area elites to familiar modes of ritual interaction under a new ruler.

His compensation of Shi Shang and Scribe Yin with dark liquor ( chang 鬯) – itself a common ritual offering – as well as cowries suggests a similar motivation on the level of individual

265 Given that the king hosted feasting at Pangjing later that year, however, it is likely, if not certain, that the yue rite and the audience of Shi Shang and Scribe Yin took place during the same tenure of the king at Chengzhou. The trip between Chengzhou and the Zhou heartland, where Pangjing was probably located, was not to be undertaken lightly. Inscriptional sources suggest that it required about a month and a half’s travel one-way; on this see Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 65, and 65, n. 113. 266 Suckling pigs are a common offering in the oracle bones, sometimes in great volume; see for example H15521, in which a hundred goats, a hundred dogs, and a hundred suckling pigs are to be killed for the Directions ( fang 方). 267 A similar argument is made above for X Shi Qing, commissioner of the X Shi Qing zun . I have not cited the clan mark on the Shi Shang vessels as evidence because, to my eye, its format is unusual. 268 On the relocation of Shang-remnant populations to Luoyang, see note 247. 269 Historical tradition holds that the Zhou kings were concerned with continuing offerings to the Shang ancestors, for which reason King Wu installed remnants of the Shang royal family in the state of Song; see Shiji , 1607-11.

176

interaction. 270 The performance of the yue rite then appears as an effort to arrogate the

legitimacy of the Shang royal-ritual institution; to maintain the loyalty of Shang remnant elites

through the giving of prestigious and ritually significant gifts; and to express a new expected

order of hierarchical relations in terms those elites would understand.

2.4: Ancestral rites never performed by the Zhou king in the inscriptions

A small but significant range of terms for rites or ritual techniques appear on Western

Zhou bronzes, but are never attributed to the Zhou kings. By and large, these are restricted to

middle and late Western Zhou inscriptions. . Some of these terms are quite common in the

received textual record, suggesting the advent of an alternative ritual vocabulary among non-

royal Zhou elites. The following section will consider these terms individually; the chapter

conclusion will approach their collective implications for the state of Zhou ritual in the middle to

late Western Zhou period.

2.4.1: Chang 嘗

The term chang is a rare creature indeed – a ritual term from the Zhou bronzes that has no precedent in the Shang oracle bones. 271 It appears first in two late Western Zhou inscriptions, both of which declare it as an intended purpose of their production. 272 The Sixth-year

Zhousheng gui 六年琱生簋 (4293) (also known as the Shaobo Hu gui ) puts it as follows:

270 On specific uses of the dark liquor chang 鬯 in Zhou ancestral ritual, see the discussion of di/chi 帝/啻 below. 271 JGWZGL contains no reference for chang , and the CHANT OBI database contains no cases thereof. 272 These are not, however, the first instances of the character chang 嘗 in the inscriptions; it indicated a location or lineage as well, judging from its appearance in the inscriptions of the Xiao you (5433) and Xiao zun (6009) as part of the name Changgong 嘗公.

177

…琱生對揚（朕）宗君其休，用乍（作）（朕）剌（烈）且（祖）（召）公嘗… …In response, Zhousheng praises the beneficence of his ancestral lord, thereby making a tasting ( chang ) gui -tureen for his brilliant ancestor the Duke of Shao…

This case is somewhat ambiguous; but the inscription of the Ji ding , mentioned in the section on

zheng above, offers confirmation that chang referred to a ritual practice, placing it in parallel

with zheng in the phrase yong zheng yong chang 用烝用嘗, “for use in zheng -offering and

chang -offering.” 273

The Ji ding instance is the first case of a pattern of use that would come to characterize

chang in later materials, both inscriptional and received. The classic textual understanding of

chang as a rite name designates it as an autumn rite, pairing it with zheng designated as a winter

rite in later formulations of the seasonal rites of the Zhou state. 274 The zheng/chang pairing recurs in Eastern Zhou bronze inscriptions as well; it appears in the Chenhou Wu gui (4145) and the Fourteenth-year Chenhou Wu gui vessel set (4646-8), dated by JC to the late Western Zhou period. 275 Based on these appearances in later texts and on its mundane meaning of “to taste,”

Liu Yu suggests that chang 嘗 was a rite in which the fruits of the new year’s harvest were first formally sampled. 276 The rite’s association with the harvest is probably behind its consistent

273 Ji ding 姬鼎 (2681). 274 This model appears in the “Wang zhi,” “Ji tong,” and “Ming tang wei” sections of the Liji¸ as well as the “Da zong bo” section of the Zhouli ; notably, chang and zheng are consistently named as the autumn and winter rites, while the spring and summer rites vary between models. See Zhouli , “Da zong bo,” Shisanjing zhushu, 758-9; “Si zun yi,” 773-4; Liji , “Wang zhi,” Shisanjing zhushu, 1335-6; “Ming tang wei,” 1489-90; “Ji tong,” 1606. In the absence of other rite names, zheng and chang are still commonly paired in the “Shang song” and “Xiao ya” sections of the Shijing in particular; see Mao shi, “Na,” Shisanjing zhushu , 620-1; “Chu ci,” 468; “Lie zu,” 621-2. Zhouli , “Si zun yi,” pairs the two as well; see 773-4. Zuozhuan , Xigong 33 rd year lists di 禘, zheng , and chang together without a fourth item; see 1834. The “Xiao ya” poem “Tian bao” also lists the series yue ci zheng chang , though it does not assign seasons to the individual rites; see 412. 275 Also extant is the pairing sui chang 歲嘗; this appears in a cluster of inscriptions of Warring States Chu origin, including those of the Chu Wang Xiong Qing(?) Ye(?) ding 楚王熊鼎 (2479), the Chu Wang Xiong Qing (?) ding 楚王熊鼎 (2623), the Chu Wang Xiong Gan ding 楚王熊悍鼎 (2794-5), etc. 276 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 511.

178

presentation along with zheng in post-Western Zhou materials; as noted with respect to zheng , a

direct connection with the natural world would tend to perpetuate seasonal associations as

compared with rites, such as yue 禴, that had no known connection therewith.

For our purposes, the notable points about chang are that it appears abruptly in the inscriptional record near the end of the Western Zhou period as a declared purpose for bronzes; that, as in its later textual manifestations, it was associated with zheng 烝, such that the two could be common purposes for the same bronze, and so was probably a food offering; and that, as implied by the existence of the Ji ding , it could be carried out by an appropriately equipped

aristocratic woman. 277

2.4.2: Sheng 升

Chen Mengjia identifies the term sheng 升, early form , later meaning “to lift up,” as a

ritual term; he suggests that it is related to the terms deng 登 and xian 獻, both generally meaning “to present.” 278 The Western Zhou inscriptions contain one case in which sheng

operates in this fashion. That is in the inscription of the You gui 簋 (4194), probably a late

Western Zhou bronze, which commemorates the king’s recounting of You’s merits and gift of

oxen: 279

277 It is tempting to cast chang as a new rite in the sphere of late Western Zhou elite ritual activities, entering the scene as part of the same changes in the dynamics of royal vs. non-royal ritual that seem to have driven other changes in the ritual of the Zhou. A line from the New Text Bamboo Annals complicates that picture by stipulating that King Cheng, during the fourth year of his reign, “first tasted the wheat” ( chu chang mai 初嘗麥); see Bamboo Annals , King Cheng, 4th year, p. 145. This case of chang was sufficiently well known to lend its name to a chapter of the Yizhoushu ; see Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu , 313-21. No inscriptions predating the late Western Zhou employ the term, however. 278 Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi zhong , 140. The character image is from JGWZGL 3220, p. 3235. 279 JC dates this bronze to the middle Western Zhou. Noting the late proliferation of ridged, “tile-patterned” vessels, Shirakawa nonetheless suggests a King Mu date for this particular vessel; see Shirakawa 18.238-42, esp. 242.

179

…既拜首，升于（厥）文 （祖）考… You then bows and strikes his head, performing sheng to his cultured grandfathers and deceased father…

Two further possible cases appear in the JC Western Zhou inscriptions, in the late Western Zhou inscriptions of the Bo Taishi Li xu 伯大師釐盨 (4404) and the Shi Ke xugai 師克盨蓋 (4468).

Both of these are in the phrase lü sheng 旅升, however, declared as the purpose of the vessels in

question, and I suspect that this phrase simply means “for carrying [ sheng ] during travel,” i.e.,

“portable.” 280

The sense of sheng to ancestors or natural forces as a technical ritual term seems to have

waned in the later sources. Later bronze inscriptions most often use sheng as a unit of volume. 281

In Eastern Zhou received texts, the term most often means either this unit of measurement or “to lift up, to ascend” in a mundane sense; the former is its Shuowen gloss, while the latter accounts for most of its many appearances in the Liji , for example. 282 It appears in the Zhouli only as a unit of measurement as well. 283 One brief passage in the “Li qi” chapter of the Liji points to a

lingering sense of its meaning as a ritual act. 284

It is difficult, based on the You ding inscription alone, to suggest that sheng survived into

the Western Zhou period as a term for a ritual act, given that it mostly lost that sense in later

materials. If we do read the You ding inscription in this manner, though, then it is notable that the one case thereof in the inscriptions does not appear until late in the period.

280 Many bronzes record their creation simply for lü , “travel”; see for example the Xiaochen gui 小臣簋 (2678), the Bo Mifu ding 伯密父鼎 (2487), etc. 281 See for example the Third-year Zhao Shi ding 三年詔事鼎 (2651), the Qingong gui 秦公簋 (4315), etc. 282 See Shuowen , 719; Liji , “Qu li [shang],” Shisanjing zhushu , 1248; “Yue ling,” 1370, etc. 283 Zhouli , “Li shi,” Shisanjing zhushu , 917; “Zi ren,” 925. 284 Liji , “Li qi,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1440.

180

2.4.3: Sui 歲

The famous inscription of the Maogong ding 毛公鼎 (2841), a late Western Zhou vessel commemorating the king’s confirmation of a Father An 父 to high office and conferral upon him of lavish rewards, contains a case of sui that may refer to a ritual act: 285 The statement appears at the end of the king’s enumeration of his gifts to Father An, which included a chariot with implements:

…易（賜）女（汝）（茲）（賸），用歲用政（征）。 …[I] give you this vehicle for use in sui and on campaign. (Maogong ding 毛公鼎 [2841])

This ambiguous example is the only case in the Western Zhou inscriptions in JC in which sui potentially refers to a ritual act; other Western Zhou examples use the term to mean “[with] the season.” 286 Later inscriptions, however, frequently use sui in such a sense; in particular, a complex of vessels associated with the eastern Zhou-affiliate states describe the process of

“serving the sui ” ( shi sui 事歲), and another group of vessels produced by kings of Chu pair sui with chang 嘗, presumably referring to ritual activities associated with the harvest. 287

In most pre-Qin texts, the term sui means “season” and by extension “year”; the phrase

sui zhong 歲終, “year’s end,” dominates its use even in the ritually focused Zhouli , for

285 Li Feng dates the Maogong ding to the late Western Zhou based on comparison of its shape and ornamentation with the Guo Wengong ding 虢文公鼎 (2636) and the Song ding 頌鼎 (2829). See Bureaucracy , 85, n. 92; see also Daxi, 136; MWX, 316-9; and Shirakawa 30.181, 637-87, all cited therein, and Shaughnessy, Sources , 107 n. 2. 286 See the inscriptions of the Hu ding 曶鼎 (2838) and the Shi Qiang pan 史牆盤 (10175). The Li gui 利簋 (4131) inscription, which commemorates the conquest of Shang by King Wu, contains the term in its sense as Jupiter, “the Harvest Star.” 287 The former include the Guo Cha X 國差 (10361), which describes its production on behalf of the Marquis of Qi 齊, as well as the Chen Xi hu 陳喜壺 (9700), the Chen Zhang hu 陳璋壺 (9703), the Gongzi Tu Zhe hu 公子土折壺 (9709), the Chen Jiang jian 陳璋(9975), the Chen Chun fu 陳純釜 (10371), and the Zi 子禾子釜 (10374); the latter are the various Chu-affiliate vessels cited above under chang 嘗.

181

example. 288 In the Shang bone inscriptions, sui already carried this meaning, but it also indicated a manner of offering livestock animals, or sometimes human victims. JGWZGL suggests its congruity with the related character gui 劌, “to cut, to stab,” noting the Guangyun gloss of that character as ge 割.289 A single example from early texts suggests that this method of offering

was known to King Cheng among Western Zhou kings, at least; that is the final portion of the

“Luo gao,” already examined above in the section on zheng , in which this line appears:

戊辰，王在新邑，烝祭, 歲文王騂牛一，武王騂牛一。 On the wuchen day, the king was at the New City; he performed a zheng-offering. He sui -offered one red ox to King Wen and one to King Wu. (“Luo gao”) 290

Fundamentally, this is in accord with the use of the term in the OBI, with respect to which

JGWZGL expresses difficulty in distinguishing its use as a “method of offering” ( jifa 祭法) from

its use as the name of an offering in and of itself ( jiming 祭名). 291 It is of note that the only such case in the Western Zhou record describes the king’s actions at Chengzhou, the new capital in the former Shang heartland and home to the relocated remnants of the Shang populace.

By the Eastern Zhou, then, and, if the Maogong ding example is applicable, by the end of

the Western Zhou, the sense of sui as the ritual cutting of a livestock offering – once implemented publicly by the Zhou king – had faded from elite consciousness, such that the term

288 See for example Zhouli , “Da zai,” Shisanjing zhushu , p. 650; “Gong zheng,” 657. The Zhouli even contains a section on the duties of an official designated zhisui 職歲, whose duties concerned the management of taxes rather than the arrangement of a sui rite; see Zhouli , “Zhi sui,” Shisanjing zhushu , 682. 289 JGWZGL ,2406. 290 See note 206. The transcription follows the CHANT edition; however, I have changed the punctuation given by CHANT to reflect my understanding of the relationship of sui 歲 to the following phrases. 291 JGWZGL , 2406. This common difficulty is one of Liu Yuan’s arguments against the utility of the “rite name” approach; see Liu Yuan, Jizuli , 19-31. As mentioned above, the distinction is of little concern for our purposes.

182

could be repurposed to refer to other types of rite, in particular those associated with the

harvest. 292

2.4.4: Yin 禋

Yin is another term that, like chang , is absent from the Shang oracle bones, appearing in the inscriptional record for the first time in the Western Zhou bronzes. Its earliest occurrence is in the long, detailed inscription of the Shi Qiang pan , a middle Western Zhou inscription containing a panegyric list of the commissioner’s patrilineal ancestors: 293 There yin appears in the compound phrase yin si 禋祀, apparently referring to livestock offerings in general, judging

from the colorful language of the inscription. The same is true of its one remaining occurrence

in a Western Zhou inscription, that of the Nanshi Dian hu 史 壺 (9718), a late Western

Zhou bronze that records as its creation “for use in making offerings ( yin si ) in this ancestral temple hall” ( yong yin si yu zi zong shi 用禋祀于茲宗室). In Eastern Zhou materials as well,

both inscriptional and received, yin is almost always paired with si or xiang 享 and used to refer to ancestral offerings in a general sense. 294

Two received texts of possible Western Zhou date employ the term by itself, if not in a

vacuum. One is the “Zhou song” poem “Wei qing,” which celebrates King Wen’s establishment

of Zhou ceremonial tradition; in that context, it almost certainly refers to sacrificial offerings in

292 The Shang rite/ritual method known as sui had no relation with the seasons, judging from a cluster of oracle bone inscriptions containing the term that give the months of their composition; see H00102, H00319, H00313, H00320, H00339, H00340, and H00377. 293 The Shi Qiang pan is generally accepted as a King Gong vessel, since the list of Zhou kings in its inscription runs up to and including King Mu. See Shaughnessy, Sources , 111. 294 See the inscriptions of the Ai Cheng Shu ding 哀成叔鼎 (2782), the Caihou 蔡侯申尊(蔡侯尊) (6010) and Caihou pan 蔡侯盤 (10171), and the Zhongshan Wang X hu 中山王壺 (9735); the latter pairs yin with a character absent from the Shuowen but which may well be zhai 齋. See also Zuozhuan , Yingong 11, Huangong 6, and Xianggong 9, Shisanjing zhushu, 1736, 1750, 1943; Zhouli , “Da zongbo,” 757-8; “Da zhu,” 811; “Da sikou,” 871, and “Xiao sikou,” 874; and Mao shi , “Da tian,” 477; “Sheng min,” 529-30; and “Yun han,” 561.

183

general. 295 The other is once again the “Luo gao.” One of its cases of yin , in which the term refers back to a ceremony at which the king acted as ritual guest and killed a sacrifice, has already appeared above in the section on zheng 烝. The others appear earlier, when the Duke of

Zhou describes his receipt of two you -urns of dark liquor that he will use in offerings to Kings

Wen and Wu. 296 The use of the term yin 禋 to indicate an offering of liquor, followed soon afterward by another appearance in which it refers to a livestock offering, suggests that the compilers or editors of the “Luo gao” understood it to denote ancestral offerings in general, as in the other cases considered here.

All told, two points respecting yin deserve particular note: one, that it emerged in the middle Western Zhou as a previously unattested term for ancestral offerings; and two, that in the

Shi Qiang pan inscription, the capacity to conduct offerings in general, as indicated by the compound term yin si 禋祀, was seen as sufficient characterization for Scribe Qiang’s ancestor

Grandfather Xin in the sequential enumeration of his ancestral line.

2.4.5: Zhuo 酌

Zhuo, “to ladle wine, to toast,” is yet another term with later ritual connotations that does not seem to exist in the Shang OBI, though certain unidentified characters such as JGWZGL

2729 and 2738 resemble its later form enough that an argument could be made. 297 It makes

its first appearance in a single late Western Zhou inscription, that split between the two Bo

Gongfu shao 伯公父勺 (9935-6), discovered in a cache at Yuntang village in Fufeng county,

295 Mao shi, “Wei qing,” Shisanjing zhushu , 584. 296 Here I follow Legge’s reading; see Legge, The Shoo King , 449. 297 See JGWZGL , 2700, 2738. Image following JC 9935 (AS).

184

Shaanxi, in 1976. 298 The shao themselves are, as the name implies, finely decorated, ladle- shaped wine cups clearly intended for the zhuo that they declare as a purpose of their creation,

along with xian 獻, “presentation,” xiang 享, and xiao 孝 (though the inscription intriguingly

refers to the vessels as jue -cups rather than shao -ladles). To my knowledge, this is the only

appearance of the character zhuo 酌 in any pre-Qin bronze inscription.

The term assumes some importance in later texts, especially in the Yili , wherein its appearances are too frequent to list; it is common in the Liji and Zhouli as well, and it gives its name to both a Yizhoushu chapter and a poem from the “Zhou song” section of the Shijing .299 In

light of its importance as a ritual technique, though certainly not a ceremony in its own right, in

the received texts, I have thought it well to include it here; to note that the only inscription

containing it adorns a pair of vessels produced by a powerful regional lord of the late Western

Zhou, rather than a king; and to note as well that the vessels in question are of an archaic type

and call themselves by an archaic name. 300

2.5: Conclusions

Traditional records hold, and the contents of the Zhouyuan oracle bones confirm, that the

Zhou royal house was familiar with some ritual practices of the Shang before the uprising of the

298 See JC (AS database); Shaanxi sheng Zhouyuan kaogudui, “Shaanxi Fufeng xian Yuntang, Zhuangbai er hao Xi Zhou tongqi jiaocang,” Wenwu 1978.11, 6-10, esp. 8. MWX assigns the vessels to King Xiao; see MWX 304, 220. 299 See for example Yili, “Shi guan li,” Shisanjing zhushu, 956; Zhouli, “Si zun yi,” 773-4; Liji, “Li qi,” 1441; Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu, “Wen zhuo jie,” 27-37. The poem “Zhuo” is, however, one of the few to bear a traditional title that does not appear in the body of the poem itself. “Zhuo,” Shisanjing zhushu , 604. 300 Of 41 vessels identified by the AS database as shao , 24 are dated to the Shang; one to either the late Shang or early Western Zhou; two to the early Western Zhou; two (the Bo Gongfu shao themselves) to the late Western Zhou; and the remaining 12 to the Warring States period. The Bo Gongfu shao are thus quite unusual for their time.

185

western coalition. 301 After the conquest of Shang – immediately after, in point of fact – the Zhou kings began a program of public ritual activity that included a variety of ancestral rites with their origins in Shang practice. Their activities in this regard included hosting major ritual events at centers of power both old (the conquered city of Yin, Zongzhou and other sites in the Zhou heartland) and new (the “New City” of Chengzhou on the Luo River). These events, which combined offerings to royal ancestors with feasting and drinking, formal recognition of the accomplishments of subordinates, and direct distribution of largesse, created a context linking prestige, recognition, and wealth in the post-Shang order with the coherence of the Zhou royal line. At the highest level of the formative Zhou elite community, they created chances for the kings to manage relationships with local power-holders from across the far-flung scope of the new Zhou territory. At lower levels, by creating opportunities for subordinate elites to participate in the royal process of relationship-building, they encouraged such elites to conceive of ancestral ritual as a medium through which status was to be achieved, thus providing an alternative for the ongoing system of military success and patronage.

The ritual events hosted by the Zhou royal house pursued a participatory strategy; taking

part was a privilege accompanied by rewards rather than an opportunity for discipline and

intimidation. 302 These royal rewards provided both the material and immaterial resources to support the production of inscribed bronzes for the ancestral cults of participants; the majority of early Western Zhou records of specific rites are relics of this process, though certain texts such as the “Luo gao” chapter and the Bamboo Annals play their part. The spreading practice of the production of inscribed bronzes – itself inherited from Shang ritual practices and expanded upon

301 See for example Mao shi, “Wei qing,” Shisanjing zhushu , 584. 302 The lack of large-scale human sacrifice in Zhou as compared with Shang rites is, I suspect, a manifestation of this participatory strategy, related to the Zhou effort to unite a broad swath of northern China under a unified coalition rather than as a network of tributary states.

186

– allowed the relationships enacted at these events to reach across otherwise insurmountable

distances in space and time. 303 The complex of royal ancestral ritual attendance, reward, and implementation of the reward in local ancestral ritual carried the message of a Zhou elite identity in which the king operated as an “obligatory passage point,” through whom status within both state and lineage must be sought. 304 This complemented the political model pursued by the early

Zhou kings, wherein they delegated complete but conditional authority over far-flung settlements to local rulers bound to the royal house by (real or imagined) lineage ties. 305

During the middle Western Zhou period, the Zhou royal house occasionally engaged in direct patronage of the ancestral cults of non-royal elites (cf. Da gui , Rong Zhong ding , and Ren ding ), in the form of gifts of livestock for the di-rite and the offering known as da lao. Along with the hosting of royal ancestral-ritual events and the royal sponsorship of the physical infrastructure of ancestral worship during the early Western Zhou, 306 this patronage shows the

specific interest of Zhou kings in disseminating their brand of ancestral worship – based on

Shang practice, but with significant differences – throughout the formative Zhou state. 307 Non-

royal Zhou elites took up individual ritual practices to varying degrees, at least as gauged by

their appearance in the bronze inscriptions. In particular, the hui -entreaty gained traction as a

303 The problem of enabling associations created by ephemeral face-to-face interactions to endure long enough to support group formation is one of the forces driving the inclusion of non-humans (such as inscribed bronzes) in social networks; see Latour’s characterization in Rethinking the Social , 63-86, esp. 69-72. 304 See Callon, 203-6. 305 For the model of the Western Zhou state as a “delegatory kin-ordered settlement state,” see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 294-9. For an example of the composition of a lineage myth to fit a regional state into the political system created by the Zhou expansion, see the account of the foundation of Wu 吴 in Shiji , 1445-6. 306 On the involvement of the Zhou kings in setting up the physical infrastructure of ancestral ritual, see chapter 1. The inscription of the Rong Zhong ding , discussed in this chapter, contains another likely example. 307 Liu Yu has previously noted the general trend of ceremonial terminology in the inscriptions away from Shang vocabulary; see Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” pp 514-5. Liu’s assumption seems to be that the Zhou held closely to Shang practices early in the Western Zhou period due to the superior degree of advancement of Shang culture. I follow the alternative interpretation that Shang-style rites provided common ground for the Zhou royal house and Shang-remnant aristocracy at a time when the management of former Shang populations was still the source of much difficulty for the Zhou central powers. In the dissertation conclusion, I will argue that important points distinguishing the ancestral ritual of the Zhou royal house from that of the Shang were in place at the beginning of the Western Zhou period.

187

common declared purpose of the production of inscribed bronzes; the zheng -offering survived

throughout the period, also becoming a purpose for the casting of bronzes in certain cases; and

the zhu -invocation, or at least a variety of offices named for it, developed into an elaborate

institution. These had certain natural factors acting on their behalf. Zheng was associated with

the natural phenomenon of the harvest; zhu provided a venue for the arrogation of public

attention outside the context of military endeavor, serving the interests of parties both inside and

outside the royal house; hui denoted an action fundamental to the entire concept of the ancestral

cult, i.e., the appeal to ancestral spirits for blessings.

A wide variety of rites or ritual techniques introduced by the royal house in the early

Western Zhou period, however, including di , yu , rong , liao , su , yue , and sui , disappeared from

the inscriptional record. Some of these – in particular, su and yue – were closely associated with

Shang remnant populations, the consolidation of Zhou power in north-central China, and the

establishment of the new capital of Chengzhou. Concern of the Zhou kings with these rites may

have waned as distance from the Shang era grew and the remaining Shang-affiliate elites

developed a deeper investment in the Zhou group identity. Rites that enjoyed direct royal

patronage – di and lao in particular –faded despite initial royal efforts to support their

performance among non-royal elites. Combined with changing models of patronage and

political appointment, this likely indicates a redirection of royal resources after the middle

Western Zhou period. 308 Other rites, such as sui and potentially chang , were performed by kings at the beginning of the period but then disappeared from the record, only to reappear in the late

Western Zhou in non-royal inscriptions – sometimes, as with sui , in radically different forms.

Beyond chang and sui , certain terms for types of ritual practice arose in middle or late Western

308 Chapter 4 will explore changes that took place in ritual manifestations of patronage during the middle Western Zhou period, especially with respect to the practice known as mieli 蔑歷 and the much-vaunted appointment ceremony.

188

Zhou inscriptions independent of any recorded royal activities; among these, sheng , like sui , had

precedent in the Shang oracle bones, while yin and zhuo , like chang , did not.

The fading of accounts of specific royal rituals from the inscriptional record, the

cessation of royal patronage of livestock offerings after the middle Western Zhou, and the

changes in ritual vocabulary that began in the middle Western Zhou and continued into the late

Western Zhou suggest a shift in the strategy of the Zhou royal house away from ancestral rites as

preferred intermediaries in the continuing performance of Zhou identity. The disappearance of

records of royal performance or patronage of ancestral-ritual acts from bronze inscriptions does

not, however, guarantee that those acts ceased to be performed everywhere. Judging from the

continued appearance of terms such as hui and zheng on non-royal bronzes, Zhou elites continued to conduct ancestral rites of early vintage that carried intrinsic value for them; and the renewed appearance of sui and in particular chang may reflect revival of practices that had lost

royal favor among non-royal performers. Further, many terms that emerged first in the bronze

inscriptions in the middle or late Western Zhou and in association with non-royal elite activities

– chang , yin , zhuo , and lao , for example – became quite common in later treatments of Zhou ritual, indicating that the kernels of later understandings of Western Zhou ritual derived from practices serving interests other than those of the Zhou royal house. Overall, it appears that the middle portion of the Western Zhou period saw a severing of the direct connections between royal ancestral-ritual practices and those of non-royal elites.

The middle Western Zhou also saw substantial changes in the approach of the Zhou kings to the public recognition of subordinates, the assignment of offices, and the distribution of largesse. The following chapters will explore the changes that took place in ritual manifestations of authority and patronage over the course of the Western Zhou period, considering the

189 relationship of those changes to the shifting roles of ancestral ritual in the Zhou state project and the creation of inscribed bronzes. The conclusion to the dissertation will connect these trends with the set of phenomena elsewhere referred to as the “ritual revolution” as part of an overall characterization of the evolution of Zhou elite ritual along with the Western Zhou state.

190

CHAPTER 3 FIGURING THE KING: MIMESIS, PRODUCTION, AND THE RITUAL PORTRAYAL OF ZHOU KINGSHIP

Mighty, mighty King Wu protects and sees to his men. Throughout the Four Directions, he is able to settle their households…

Shijing, “ Huan ”1

3.1: Introduction

The performance of Shang-style ancestral rituals provided the early Western Zhou kings with a framework for the construction of a coherent Zhou group identity in the wake of the

Shang conquest. Royal ancestral-ritual events created opportunities for the instantiation of patronage relationships between kings and high-ranking elites and between those elites and their subordinates. Inscribed bronzes cast to commemorate those events supported the performance of similar ancestral offerings at the local level, making the “distributed personhood” of the king a physical part of the formation of lineage identity.

This framework did not, however, constitute the entire ritual program of the Zhou royal house. The Zhou kings supplemented it with a small number of ritual techniques generating prestige for the king by framing him against locations, tasks, and other, non-Zhou populations.

In the early Western Zhou, these rites focused on the reach and potence of the Western Zhou king as a military leader, emphasizing his maintenance of control over the territory of the Zhou.

In the middle Western Zhou period, however, new forms of ritual recast the king as the driving force behind the production of key resources, emphasizing the centrality of the king to the well- being of the state.

This chapter examines ritual efforts to frame the Western Zhou kings against the backdrop of non-devotional activities. It will characterize these rituals as a component of the

1 Shisanjing zhushu , 604-5.

191

ongoing figuration of the Zhou king as a representative spokesperson of the formative Zhou

group identity. 2 These framing efforts, it will argue, drew on the historical underpinnings of the

Zhou as a military coalition and were directly connected to specific geopolitical concerns of the

Zhou royal house.

Based on the limited range of such activities during the early Western Zhou and the introduction of new rites during the middle Western Zhou period, the chapter will show that changes in the symbolic characterization of the Zhou king at that point sought to broaden the royal identity from coalition head to cultural epitome. These changes, I will argue, formed part of a wider effort to intensify royal control over disparate aspects of the operation of the Zhou state. While the pursuit of this goal created strong motivations for commitment to the royal house, it also facilitated the formation of a Zhou elite identity divorced from royal interests.

3.2: Rituals framing the Zhou king as mediator 3

While the Zhou implementation of Shang ancestral ritual created a framework of relations centered on the Zhou royal house and leading back to the conquest of Shang, it did not establish a qualitative distinction between the Zhou kings and other Western Zhou elites. Indeed, the emergent model of the Mandate of Heaven promoted the interchangeability of elite lineages, implying that the Zhou royal house, like the Shang before them, could be replaced under the right circumstances. 4 Certain non-ancestral Western Zhou ritual techniques, however, sought to

establish the Zhou king as a perceived nexus point not just between the royal lineage and lesser

noble lineages, but also between the Zhou as a collective and the surrounding human and natural

2 On the phenomenon of figuration of agencies, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 52-4. 3 On the technical meaning of mediators in actor-network theory, see ibid., 37-42. 4 On the origin of the concept of the Mandate of Heaven in Western Zhou materials, see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 314-7.

192

worlds. 5 The prototypical effort to achieve this goal, and, perhaps not coincidentally, the best narrated in the inscriptions, is the practice referred to as feng 豐 or li 禮, and, in particular, the

ceremony called the da feng/li 大豐/禮, or “great rite.”

3.2.1: Feng /li 豐/禮

The first chapter of this work approached the inscription of the He zun 尊 (JC 6014) as a trace of the promulgation of ancestral ritual by the early Western Zhou kings. The introductory line of that inscription contains a term that played a key role in Western Zhou ritual formulations of kingship:

隹王初  宅于成周，復爯 （武）王豐，祼自天… It was when the king first moved to take up residence at Chengzhou, offered the feng/li to King Wu, and performed libations from (starting with?) Heaven…6

The character feng 豐 is usually, though not universally, read in this inscription as representing the later character li 禮, referring to “rites” in a general sense. 7 Derived ultimately from the character feng 豐,8 the term li 禮 would by the late Spring and Autumn period come to denote

5 This model of the distinction argued for is problematic; as the following pages and the discussion in chapter 5 will show, the relevant characterization here was between Zhou-adherent elites, to be integrated into the Zhou state, and non-Zhou-elite entities (human and animal), to be controlled or eliminated. 6 This introductory line of the He zun inscription is problematic. Some scholars read the character fu 福, with the probable meaning of “allotments of sacrificial meat,” in place of the guan 祼 offered by the JC transcription; see Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” Wenwu 1976.1, 60-3, esp. 60; Li Xueqin, “He zun xin shi,” Zhongyuan wenwu 1981.1, 35-45, esp. 35; MWX , 20-1, n. 2. For further discussion of this point, see the section on guan in Appendix 1. 7 See Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” 60, 63, n. 1; MWX , 20-1, n. 2. Note that MWX reads the character as a modifier to the (as Ma sees it) fu 福 following it and takes the combination to mean “ceremonial meat.” To my knowledge, this is the only case in the Western Zhou inscriptions in which the character feng may refer to “rites” in a general sense. Still, in light of the inscription’s reference to King Wu and of the activities attributed to that king in the Tian Wang gui inscription (considered below), I am inclined to read the term in that sense here, rather than as the more specific li 醴. 8 See the entries for li and feng in Duan Yucai, Shuowen jiezi zhu , Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1981, 2, 208.

193

ritual practices in general and the ritual practices associated by ru 儒 thinkers with the Western

Zhou royal house and the Duke of Zhou in particular. This was the sense of the term on which

Confucius drew when describing his project of directed enculturation. 9

In the early stages of the Chinese script, however, li and feng had yet to be distinguished graphically. 10 In the Shang and Zhou inscriptions, feng carried a series of meanings – some

clearly associated with ritual, others less so. The following section will review the etymology of

the term feng 豐 and its various uses in the inscriptions, prior to a detailed consideration of the specific rite known in the inscriptions as da feng 大豐 or da li 大禮.

3.2.1.1: The etymology of feng/li

The oracle bone inscriptions contain three character forms of relative similarity to feng .

JGWZGL 2809 (fig. 3.1, Appendix 2) is the most “standard” of these, commonly identified by scholars with the Shuowen entry for feng 豊 and often read as li .11 This character appears to have

acted as a noun referring to some kind of ritual implement; based on its frequent use in

conjunction with the term yong 庸, the JGWZGL editors suggest that it may have had to do with

9 As expressed, for example, in the famous line from the Lunyu :

子曰：「道之以政，齊之以刑，民免而無恥；道之以德，齊之以禮，有恥且格。」 The Master said, “Guide them with policies and regulate them with punishments, and the people will shamelessly avoid them; guide them with virtue and regulate them with the rites, and the people will have a sense of shame and thus conform to them.”

See Liu Baonan, Shisanjing Qing ren zhushu: Lunyu zhengyi , Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1990, 41-3. 10 In fact, as late as the Han, the two characters were considered to be related and somewhat interchangeable, as the Shuowen entry for feng 豐 shows:

豊行禮之器也。从豆。象形。凡豊之屬皆从豊。讀與禮同。 Feng 豊 is an implement for the performance of rites. It is derived from the dou 豆 radical and is pictographic. All [characters] in the feng 豐 category are derived from it. It is read in the same way as li 禮.

See Shuowen , 208. 11 Luo Zhenyu, Wang Guowei, and Sun Haibo all draw the first connection, while Wang Xiang and Sun Haibo both draw the second, as do the JC editors; see the discussion in JGWZGL 2809, 2786-8; JC 6014, 6015, 4261.

194

music. 12 The variant 2808, with wood radicals replacing the strings of jade in the top part of the

character, appears once as a place name; JGWZGL identifies it as a different character. 13

JGWZGL likewise reads variant 2807 in all its forms as a distinct character, which it identifies with feng 豐. This character appears in the OBI both as a personal name component and as a stand-alone divination sentence, the latter of which JGWZGL leaves uninterpreted. 14

The AS database identifies a number of occurrences of feng 豐 in the Western Zhou inscriptions. 15 A cursory inspection suggests that most of these appear to follow JGWZGL character 2809 (fig. 3.2, Appendix 2), though some are difficult to distinguish (e.g., Tian Wang gui , Zuoce Hu you ), and the Fenggong ding (2152) character in particular seems to me to be an instance of number 2807. The range of characters thus identified by the AS database encompasses a variety of uses, however, which we must rely on context to distinguish. 16

Two specific uses of the character are most relevant for the study of Western Zhou ritual

techniques. First, feng is also interpreted as li 醴, “sweet wine,” in some contexts (see fig. 3.2,

12 JGWZGL , 2788. 13 JGWZGL , 2786. 14 JGWZGL , 2786. 15 To be precise, JC identifies 96 inscriptions of Western Zhou date containing the character feng 豐 and 4, including the Mai fangzun inscription discussed below, as containing feng 豊. 16 A number of inscriptions refer to an “Elder of Feng” ( Fengbo 豐伯); see for example the Fengbo ge 豐伯戈 (11014) and the Fengbo fu 豐伯簠 (NA0042). Early inscriptions also refer occasionally to a “King of Feng” and a “Fenggong,” suggesting either that the name Feng was shared between different locations, or that the recognized status of the location or lineage known as Feng within the Zhou social sphere was initially fluid. The geographic distribution of the bronzes referring to these personages suggests that multiple locations or lineages may have carried the name Feng. See the Fengwang fu 豐王斧 (11774), the Fengwang tongpao 豐王銅泡 (11848-50), and the Fenggong ding 豐公鼎 (2152). According to JC, the Fengwang fu was reportedly found in Yi 易 County, Hebei; the provenance of the three Fengwang tongpao is unknown. The Fenggong ding was discovered in tomb 7 of the Yu state cemetery at Baoji; see JC 2152; Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng, Baoji Yu guo mudi , 108, fig. 85.1, cited therein. Aside from its use as a name component, feng appears in the Zhou inscriptions as part of the name of the Feng-Hao capital complex maintained by the Zhou royal house in present-day Fufeng county, Shaanxi, near Xi’an; for a list of scholarship on the capitals Feng and Hao and a summary of archaeological work done there, see Jessica Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” in Cambridge History , 393-7. This location is generally identified with another place-name, Zongzhou 宗周, or “Ancestral Zhou,” also common in the inscriptions, though there is some debate on this point; see Maria Khayutina, T’oung Pao 96 (2010), 6 note 13.

195

Chang Xin he [9455]), particularly when appearing in conjunction with xiang/wan 饗, “to feast”; although li 醴 has another form in the inscriptions as well. 17 Second, in three specific cases,

all dating to the early Western Zhou period, the term feng refers to large-scale ritual activities

conducted by the Zhou king and as such is often interpreted as standing for the character li 禮.18

One of these, the inscription of the He zun , opened this section. That inscription appears to use the term in a general sense, referring to the “rites” of King Wu as an overall body of practice rather than as a specific event; we will revisit this below.

The remaining cases make up part of the compound phrase da feng 大豐 or da li 大禮, which referred to a specific and elaborate ceremony conducted occasionally throughout the early

Western Zhou period and into the middle Western Zhou. The following section reviews the evidence for this ceremony and considers its role in the characterization of the Zhou kings’ relationship with the state and with the known world in general.

3.2.1.2: Da feng 大豐/da li 大禮 (“the Great Rite”)

Both the Mai fangzun 麥方尊 (6015) and Tian Wang gui 天亡簋 (4261) record instances of a ceremony called da feng 大豐 or da li 大禮, or “the Great Rite.” Considered together, they

provide a relatively complete description of the contents of the rite. As these two inscriptions are

17 The example shown is from the inscription of the Da gui 大簋 (2807), dated by JC to the middle Western Zhou. Sweet wine is of importance in later reconstructions of early ritual; see, for example, this line from the “Mingtang wei” chapter of the Liji :

夏后氏尚明水，殷尚醴，周尚酒。 The lineage of the Lords of Xia exalted bright water; the Yin exalted sweet wine ( li ); the Zhou exalted wine.

See Shisanjing zhushu , 1491. 18 JC and MWX are in agreement on this point; see JC 4261, 6014, 6015; MWX, 14-5, 20-1, 46-7. In his treatment of the Tian Wang gui inscription, Shirakawa gives a detailed summary of prior readings of the character in the Tian Wang gui and, in most cases, the Mai fangzun inscriptions. Most of these take the character as li 禮, though Kezhai and Conggu both apparently read it as the name of the city Feng 豐. See Shirakawa 1.1, 5-9.

196

of great importance in characterizing the relations between ritual terms, they are referred to

frequently throughout this work. Chapter 5 contains a full translation and discussion of the

inscription and the multi-day event it records; this discussion will focus on the portion of most

relevance to the study of feng/li .

The Mai fangzun (6015) is an exceptional vessel in every regard. Both its décor and its

inscription are extraordinarily detailed, and it records a meeting between the king and one of the

most powerful non-royal personages of the early Western Zhou era. The vessel’s commissioner,

Mai, served the Marquis of Xing ( Xinghou 邢侯) in the position of Document Maker ( zuoce 作

冊) at the time of the former’s accession and associated audience with the Zhou king. 19 The

Marquis awarded Mai metal on his return from that audience, and Mai recorded the circumstances of his ruler’s meeting with the king in the inscription of the vessel he subsequently commissioned. That meeting included an instance of the “Great Rite”:

王令辟井（邢）侯出坏，侯于井（邢），若二月，侯見于宗周，亡（尤）， （會）王京，祀。若 （翌），才（在）璧（辟）雝（雍），王乘于舟，為大豐20 （禮），王射大禽，侯乘于赤旂舟，從，死咸… The king commanded the sovereign Marquis of Xing to come out from Huai and take up the Marquisate of Xing. Around the second month, the Marquis presented himself at Zongzhou; there were no problems. He arrived when the king was holding a wan/xiang feast at the Pang Capital; a rong offering was conducted. The next day, at the biyong pond, the king rode in a boat and conducted a great feng/li rite. The king shot large birds, and the Marquis followed in a boat with a red flag; all (the birds?) were killed… (Mai fangzun 麥方尊 [6015])

As described by the Mai fangzun inscription, the situation was as follows: After receiving his

19 For this interpretation, see Bureaucracy , 43 n. 3 and 260-3. Maria Khayutina disagrees; see Khayutina, 22, n. 52. On the position of Document Maker, see Bureaucracy, 250, 310; see also Martin Kern, “The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China,” in Sergio La Porta and David Shulman, eds., The Poetics of Grammar and the Metaphysics of Sound and Sign , Leiden: Brill, 2007, 117-9, 127-40. 20 The AS database transcribes this character as 豊; however, as fig. 3.2 shows, it is clearly a case of feng 豐. I have altered the above transcription accordingly.

197

orders to take control over the state of Xing, the newly minted Marquis had an audience at

Zongzhou. 21 During the Marquis’s visit to the Zhou heartland, the king hosted a feast at

Pangjing, another frequent site of Zhou royal activity, and the Marquis was in attendance. 22 The king offered devotions to his ancestors, probably during the feast; 23 the next day, he performed the da feng /li rite in question.

This rite took place on the biyong pond, a location described in later texts as a circular body

of water with an island at the center on which a building known as the Mingtang , or “Brilliant

Hall,” stood. 24 In it, the Zhou king rode a boat around the biyong pond and shot birds, while the

Marquis of Xing followed in his wake, riding a boat displaying red flags. Once this process was completed, the Zhou king received the Marquis with unusual warmth, welcoming him into his personal chambers and awarding him gifts that included a chariot worthy of a king. 25

The inscription of the Tian Wang gui 天亡簋 (4261), 26 dateable to the reign of King Wu

21 The Mai fangzun is sometimes considered one of a small range of vessels that describe the installation of regional rulers by the Zhou king; see Bureaucracy , 43, n. 3. For a conflicting opinion, see Khayutina, 22, n. 52, cited above. The state of Xing was most likely in modern-day Hebei province; see Landscape and Power , 68-9; Bureaucracy , 262. 22 On Pangjing, see Bureaucracy , 152-3; Khayutina, 6-7, n. 15. 23 See the section on the rong rite in the preceding chapter. 24 Hence the pond’s association with the bi 壁,a type of circular jade disk with a round hole in the center, associated symbolically with the heavens; see Wang Junhua, “Biyong kao 辟雍考,” Xungen 2007.3, 59, which brings together most of the relevant pre-Qin references. On the biyong pond, see MWX , p. 14, note 2; Bureaucracy, 152- 3. Li Shan and Li Guitian argue, based on their interpretation of the Shi poem “Wen Wang you sheng,” that the biyong pond was built during the reign of King Mu and that the bronzes mentioning it must therefore date to that reign or later; see Li Shan and Li Guitian, “ Shi ‘biyong’ kao,” Hebei shifan daxue xuebao 2003.4, 70-7. However, both Wang and Li and Li omit from their discussions a line statement from the “Di Xin” section of the “new text” Zhushu jinian :

三十七年周作辟雍。 In the thirty-seventh year, the Zhou made the biyong [pond]. ( Bamboo Annals , p. 140)

Provided that one accepts the “new text” Zhushu jinian as a viable source (on which see the Introduction), this line suggests an early (i.e., pre-Shang conquest) origin for the biyong pond and thus supports a more standard dating for the bronzes discussed in this section. 25 Li Feng reads the inscription as stating that the Marquis was awarded “the right to rite in the royal chariot”; see Bureaucracy , 262. MWX seems to read the phrase as indicating the kind of chariot in which a king would ride, or, perhaps, a chariot in which the king had already ridden; see MWX, 46-7, n. 14. I follow the latter reading here. 26 The Tianwang gui is also commonly known as the Da Feng gui 大豐簋, a name derived from just the event under

198

based on the contents of its inscription, 27 describes a similar process, but provides one additional key detail:

乙亥，王又（有）大豐，王凡三方，王祀于天室，降，天亡又王，衣祀于王不（丕）顯考文王，事喜上帝，文王德在上，不（丕）顯王乍（作）省，不（丕）（肆）王乍（作）（庸），不（丕）克乞（訖）衣（殷）王祀。丁丑，王鄉（饗）大宜，王降亡28  爵、退橐，隹（唯）（朕）又（有）蔑，每啟王休于尊（）。 On the yihai day (12), the king had a great feng/li rite. The king boated in three directions. The king made offerings in the Great Hall. He descended, and Tianwang assisted the king in greatly 29 making offerings to his greatly brilliant deceased father King Wen and in serving and delighting the High Lord. King Wen’s virtue is on high. The greatly brilliant king acts as overseer; the great succeeding king sets norms. 30 Greatly he (i.e., King Wu, the “succeeding king”) finished the sacrifices of the Yin kings. On the dingchou day (14), the king held a feast with a great offering-table (?). 31 The king sent a [?] jue -cup and a retiring(?) sack down to [Tian] Wang [? This clause is unclear.] 32 It was I who had a mie (li ). [I] respectfully praise the king’s beneficence 33 in a revered gui -tureen.

Here two important points about the process known as da feng/li are clarified. One is that the

king himself rode in a boat to perform the rite; this was likely based on the use of the term cong

從, “to follow,” in the Mai fangzun inscription, but had not been explicitly stated. The second is that the king boated around the entirety of the pond, traveling in three directions.

Given the cosmological associations of the biyong pond, we may consider the da feng/li ritual as a leveraging of the mimetic logic of ritual to lend the Zhou king’s position a sense of

discussion. I rely heavily on the reading given in MWX , 14-6, in my interpretation of this inscription. 27 As such, it is accepted as a dating standard for the reign of King Wu; see Sources , 110. 28 The AS database inscription places a comma between jiang 降 and wang 亡; I have removed that comma to reflect the understanding that the latter is the object of the former. 29 Yi 衣 is sometimes interpreted as a specific rite (and as equivalent to yin 殷) in early sources; see for example Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi , 109, 138. It is also, however, known as a synonym for “great” or “extravagant;” see for example MWX, 14-5, n. 5, wherein Ma reads it as such in this inscription. I follow that reading here. For an alternative explanation of yin 殷 as representing jin 覲, “to have audience,” see MWX 115, 80, n. 1b. 30 Taking si 肆 as si 嗣, “to succeed to, to inherit.” 31 This translation of da yi 大宜 follows MWX , which identifies yi as a loan for fang 房 based on rhyme; based on its appearance in one of the “Lu song,” Ma glosses da fang 大房 as an offering table. See MWX , p. 15, n. 10. 32 Ma refrains from rendering this sentence based on lack of ready explanation for the characters; see ibid., 15, n. 11. 33 Following Ma’s reading, which takes mei 每 as min 敏, here meaning respectful, and transcribes the character here rendered qi 啟 as yang 揚, a more usual choice in this position. See ibid., 15, n. 13.

199

determinacy. By traveling to the extremes of the pond, the king mimetically extended his agency

throughout the known world. 34 The addition of shooting, as in the Mai fangzun inscription, strengthened and clarified the implications of this act. By bringing down birds in the mimetically significant space of the biyong pond, the king stated ritually that his military might extended over the entirety of the known world.

In the instance of the ritual described by the Mai fangzun inscription, the king’s overt proclamation of force must have intimated to the newly installed Marquis of Xing – delegated to administer a distant domain in Hebei, beyond the immediate control of the royal forces – the potentially perilous consequences of flying too high, as it were. 35 The Zhou king installed a safety valve in the threat, however, by assigning the Marquis himself a place in the ceremony.

Riding behind the king in a boat festooned with red flags, the Marquis was construed as the king’s bannerman, supporting him in military endeavors; but he was also witness to the symbolic consequences of defying royal authority. 36 The warmth and beneficence with which the king

received the Marquis after the ceremony – inviting him into the royal chambers and showering

him with lavish gifts – were the carrot accompanying the stick of the da feng/li ceremony.

The king’s procession in three rather than four directions is of note. In order to move across a roughly symmetrical body of water in a boat, it was of course necessary to have a launching point, and the “three directions” mentioned in the narrative of the ceremony can correspondingly

34 I avoid the term “symbolic” in favor of the term “mimetic” on the grounds that I suspect the actions in question were considered to have the power to help bring about the events they depicted. To the extent that the participants internalized the model of royal authority and relations between the king and other elites depicted in the ritual, this consideration must have been true. For a more detailed discussion of this point, see the Introduction. 35 On the location of the state of Xing, see note 21. 36 To accompany the king on campaign was a fundamental responsibility of the installed regional lords under the Western Zhou political system; see Bureaucracy , 246-8. The title hou 侯, translated here as “marquis,” depicts an arrow beneath a roof and initially denoted a person dispatched to guard the country. For a summary of the evidence on this point, see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 44, n. 4.

200

be taken to refer to those from which the king did not launch his vessel. 37 Under this model, the

king would thus have reached the extremes of all four directions of the pond over the course of

the ceremony: the three in which he traveled, and the one from which he started. The center of

Zhou culture was located on the western fringes of the sphere of influence of the Shang, from

whom the Zhou adopted much, and textual sources suggest that the Zhou conceived of

themselves as “men of the western lands.” 38 It may be that the procession of the biyong rite in

three directions was meant to echo the extension of Zhou authority across the lands perceived as

falling within the Shang cultural sphere. 39

The above two inscriptions are, to my knowledge, the only cases in the Western Zhou

inscriptions in which the term feng /li definitively denoted a specific ritual activity. The common appearance of the modifier da and use of a boat in both cases suggest that, in the early Western

Zhou, the term da feng/li referred to a particular royal ceremony in which a boat was used rather than to the performance of ritual in general. Given the frequency with which other ceremonies are mentioned in the inscriptions, and given its relatively elaborate setup requirements, the paucity of references to the da feng/li ceremony probably reflects the comparative rarity of its performance rather than a simple dearth of surviving evidence.

3.2.1.3: The Bo Tangfu ding event: an occurrence of the “Great Rite”?

37 MWX , 14-6. On the biyong pond, see MWX , 14, note 2. 38 See James Legge, ed. and tr., The Chinese classics, vol. 3: The Shoo King , Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1970, 300-1. 39 Tang Lan makes the observation about three directions as well, in his Xi Zhou qingtongqi mingwen fendai shizheng , Zhonghua shuju 1986, p. 11; cited in Li Shan and Li Guitian, 75-6. Li and Li cite Tang Lan’s interpretation of the character here rendered 凡 as tong 同, as well as Guo Moruo’s explanation of the character as feng 风 (see Daxi , vol. 2, plate 1), as preferable options to Ma’s reading as fan 汎 (see MWX, 14-5, n. 2), based on the king’s progression in three rather than four directions. This overlooks the point that Tang Lan’s interpretation is equally applicable to movement in a boat. Wang Aihe notes the representative potential of the three directions with respect to the Zhou as well, in Cosmology and Political Culture in Early China , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 60-2.

201

In fact, another inscription survives which, though it lacks the term da feng/li , records a

ceremonial event markedly similar to the rites discussed above. The Bo Tangfu ding (NA0698), recovered from tomb 183 at Zhangjiapo, Chang/an county, Shaanxi, bears an inscription describing activities of the Zhou king on the bichi 辟池 at Pangjing, the site of the ceremony recorded on the Mai fangzun .40 As this inscription contains several problematic points worthy of examination, and as it is germane to several portions of this work, I present it here in its entirety:

乙卯，王京，王ȼ辟舟，臨舟龍，咸ȼ。白（伯）唐父告備。王各，（乘）辟舟，臨ȼ白 [伯?] 旂，用射絼、 虎、貉、白鹿、白狼于辟池，咸ȼ。王蔑曆，易（賜）矩鬯一卣、貝廿朋，對揚王休，乍（作）安公寶彝。 On the yimao day, the king feasted at Pangjing. The king conducted a hui -entreaty(?) 41 toward the bi [yong pond] boat,42 approaching 43 the boat dragon.44 When the hui-entreaty(?)

40 On the discovery of the Bo Tangfu ding , see Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Fengxi fajue dui, “Chang’an Zhangjiapo M183 Xi Zhou dong shi mu fajue jianbao,” Kaogu 1989.6, 524-9. The excavators date the tomb containing the vessel to the early part of King Mu’s reign (see p. 528). As for the bichi , most scholars agree in considering it equivalent to the biyong pond; see Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding de mingwen yu shidai,” Kaogu 1990.8, 741-2; Liu Huan, “Ye tan Bo Tangfu ding mingwen de shidu – jian tan Yin dai jisi de yige wenti,” Wenbo 1996.6, 27-9; Yuan Junjie, “Bo Tangfu ding ming tongshi buzheng,” Wenwu 2011.6, 38-43, esp. 39. 41 Prior analyses of the Bo Tangfu ding inscription are unanimous in reading four of the characters in the inscription as hui ȼ and in taking them to refer to the hui -entreaty rite discussed in the prior chapter of this work; see Zhang Zhenglang, “Bo Tangfu ding , Meng Yuan ding , yan mingwen shiwen,” Kaogu 1989.6, 551-2; Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding,” 741-2; Liu Huan, 27; Yuan Junjie, 38-9. Syntactically speaking, this reading is logical and fits well in the phrase xian hui 咸ȼ, which, in combination with the description of the shooting of animals, suggests an understanding of the term as a process rather than as a single action. The use of the hui -entreaty toward a series of objects (see below) would, however, be the only such case in the entire corpus of Western Zhou inscriptions; to my knowledge, it would in fact be the only case anywhere in the inscriptions in which an offering was made to an entity other than an ancestral spirit or Heaven/the sky ( Tian ). This point by itself warrants a close look at the reading. Complicating the situation is the fact that the main readable instance of the character in the inscription (the vessel is badly corroded, and the damage shows in the published rubbing of the inscription) is morphologically unique, bearing as it does additional elements both underneath and to the sides of the core element (see the relevant table in the Appendix). Without a clearer rubbing – which may not be possible, due to the damage that the vessel has suffered – it is difficult to judge whether this holds true for all of the characters rendered as hui in the available transcriptions. I believe it is at least possible that all of these characters may represent a different word entirely (as, indeed, is often the case with modified forms of hui in the inscriptions; see the aforementioned table in the Appendix). Accordingly, I have translated these characters as “the hui-entreaty” but have marked them with question marks; and I have not included the Bo Tangfu ding in the main discussion of hui (for which see chapter 2). 42 Given the close parallels between the processes described in the Mai fangzun and Bo Tangfu ding inscriptions, the bichi can probably be identified with the biyong pond; see note 40. 43 Both Liu Huan and Yuan Junjie suggest for lin 臨 the meaning of zhi 至, “to arrive” (see Liu Huan, 29; Yuan Junjie, 39), while Liu Yu takes it as “to be near to” (Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding,” 741). 44 Most scholars have interpreted the phrase zhou long 周龍 in the inscription as referring to a particular kind of boat, the long indicating either that it was formed or decorated in the shape of a dragon (for which see Zhang Zhenglang,

202

was complete, the Elder Father Tang announced that [the preparations were] complete. The king entered and rode in the bi [yong pond] boat. [He] approached and conducted hui - entreaty(?) with a white (the Elder’s?) flag; 45 [the king] thereby shot an ox, 46 a striped tiger, 47 a panther, 48 a white deer, and a white wolf on the bi pond.49 When the hui-entreaty was completed, the king performed the recounting of merits ( mieli ), awarding [Bo Tangfu?] a you -urn of dark liquor and twenty strings of cowries. [Bo Tangfu?] praises the king’s beneficence in response, therewith making a precious, revered vessel for Duke An. 50

Although the Bo Tangfu ding inscription does not contain the term da feng/li , the process it narrates is remarkably similar to that described in the Mai fangzun inscription. The king conducted a feasting event at Pangjing; he carried out what may have been ancestral offerings; 51

he then set out on the biyong pond in a boat and shot animals. Like the Mai fangzun inscription, the Bo Tangfu ding inscription does not specify that the king traveled to the sides of the pond, as is mentioned on the Tian Wang gui ; however, given that the targets of the shooting were all land

551, and Yuan Junjie, 39) or perhaps simply that it was large and meant for royal use (Liu Huan, 29). Liu Yu offers the alternate reading long 壟, suggesting that it referred to a raised area for mooring boats (see Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding,” 741), whereas Yuan Junjie has suggested that it may have referred to a completely separate entity associated, perhaps, with the water of the biyong pond and acting potentially as the target of the devotional rite (see 41). I have followed the former interpretation in the translation. 45 The phrase bai qi 白旗 deserves consideration. All other treatments of the inscription have rendered it simply as bai 白, “white”; see Zhang Zhenglang, 551; Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding,” 741; Liu Huan, 27; Yuan Junjie, 38, 40-1. Certainly this is a viable reading; the subsequent occurrences of the character in the phrases bai lu 白鹿, “white deer,” and bai lang 白狼, “white wolf,” show that the color white held some significance in the proceedings. However, the characters bai 白 and bo 伯, “Elder,” as in “Elder Father Tang,” are orthographically identical in the Western Zhou inscriptions. It is conceivable that the in the present clause referred to the “Elder” – i.e., Bo Tangfu – and that the phrase bo qi indicated the “Elder’s flag.” The reference to the flag of Nangong 南公 in the inscription of the Da Yu ding (2837) provides a comparable example confirming the use of flags as personal emblems during the Western Zhou. The case for this reading is strengthened somewhat by comparison with the Mai fangzun ceremony, in which the Marquis of Xing rode behind the king in a boat flying a flag (specifically, a red flag) during the da feng/li rite; it is possible that Elder Father Tang played a similarly important role in the Bo Tangfu ding event. 46 Following Liu Yu in reading 絼 as an oblique term for a sacrificial ox; see Liu Yu, “Bo Tangfu ding ,” 741-2. 47 Following Liu Yu’s reading of li hu 虎; see ibid., 742. 48 Following Zhang Zhenglang’s suggestion of reading the character  as mo 貘; see Zhang Zhenglang, 551. 49 In the absence of measure words, there is no way to judge whether one or many of each of the above animals was shot; I have translated them in the singular by default. 50 Unlike many inscriptions, that of the Bo Tangfu ding does not name the individual who received gifts from the king and commissioned the vessel in its final lines. Its designation as the “Bo Tangfu ding ” is based on the reasonable assumption that the only figure named in the inscription beside the king was its commissioner. The other contents of Zhangjiapo tomb 183 are of little help, since the other inscriptions found in the tomb employ different names; see “Chang’an Zhangjiapo M183,” 526-8. 51 Depending on one’s reading of the term hui and its target; see the above notes on the inscription.

203

animals, it is likely that such was the case. 52 This inscription shows that ceremonial royal shooting of animals on the biyong pond, with elite guests playing a role in the proceedings, was carried out at least once during the early phase of the middle Western Zhou. 53

The animals used in the Bo Tangfu ding event are of crucial importance to both the

dating of the vessel and the understanding of the rite it records. The discussion of the Mai

fangzun and Tian Wang gui rites made much of the mimetic role of the biyong pond and its implications for the interpretation of the da feng/li rite. This mimetic function, I suspect, was at work in the selection of the targets for the shooting in the Bo Tangfu ding event. The Guoyu ,

and the Shiji after it, contains an account of King Mu’s military adventures in the western

reaches of Zhou territory. 54 In it, the king’s advisors urge against his plans to campaign against

the western population known as the Quanrong/Xianyun. 55 As the passage records, however, the king carried through with his attack anyway, and he brought back “four white wolves and four white deer” ( si bail u yu si bai lang 四白狼四白鹿) to the capital. 56

The Bo Tangfu ding, as we have seen, is of likely King Mu date, and its inscription makes specific mention of both white wolves and white deer as shooting targets. It is of course impossible to confirm that the wolves and deer supposedly brought to the Zhou heartland by

52 The king’s shooting at the sides of the pond was of potential mimetic significance, especially given the historical context of King Mu’s reign; for a fuller discussion, see the section on the ritual implementation of archery below. It is possible, however, that land animals may have been placed upon islands in the biyong pond; I am indebted to Li Feng for this observation. 53 For the argument on the dating of the tomb containing the Bo Tangfu ding , as well as that of the vessel itself, see “Chang’an Zhangjiapo M183,” 528. The excavators hold that Meng Yuan, mentioned in other inscriptions from the tomb, was its occupant, and note that his relationship with Bo Tangfu cannot be determined. However, they note that the vessels are generally comparable in shape, conforming to a type that they date to the King Zhao-King Mu transition. 54 For a discussion of the role of King Mu’s western campaigns in the overall trope of Western Zhou military history, in which this passage is mentioned, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 145-6. 55 On the identity of these names, see ibid. 56 Dong Zengling, Guoyu zhengyi, Kuaiji Zhang shi shi xun tang, 1880, 23-43, esp. 42; Shiji , 135-6. The above excerpt is from the former. Liu Yu has noted this parallel; see “Bo Tangfu ding, ” 742. The Guoyu is of course a much later text, and so the usual caveats apply to its use as a historical source; still, the mention of white wolves and white deer in a passage concerning King Mu is a remarkable coincidence.

204

King Mu were the same ones used in the event in which Bo Tangfu took part. Still, there is no

mention of wolves anywhere else in the AS inscription database, and deer are mentioned only a

few times; they were not part of the usual range of reward items with which the inscriptions are

concerned. 57 If the specific animals were not the same, it is likely at least that wolves and/or deer were somehow associated conceptually with the Quanrong/Xianyun population and that

King Mu drew upon that association in conducting his ritual activities on the bi pond. In the case of wolves, the orthography of the terms Quanrong and Xianyun offers some small support to that assertion. 58

I have previously argued that the king’s progression around the biyong pond in the da feng/li rite, coupled with his shooting of birds at the pond’s edges as in the Mai fangzun case, created a mimetic argument about the ability of the Zhou royal house to exercise its military potence throughout the entire Zhou territory. By placing animals associated with an outlying population, and quite possibly taken from them on a recent campaign, among the creatures to be killed at the edges of the pond, the king in the Bo Tangfu ding inscription – probably King Mu – strengthened the mimetic value of this argument in two ways: by reinforcing the correspondence between the edges of the pond and the edges of Zhou territory, and by shoring up the argument with tangible evidence of his recent military “success” on the borders of the Zhou state. This degree of consideration for the symbolic value of animals may have been an innovation of the middle Western Zhou period, a time, as we will soon see, of substantial innovations in the ritual

57 These are the Ming gui 命簋 (4112) and the Haozi you 貉子卣 (5409). 58 For an account of the connections between the terms Xianyun and Quanrong, see Li Feng, Landscape and Power , Appendix 2. Li Feng suggests that the association of the Xianyun with dogs, and hence the emergence of the term Quanrong, developed later, when their name came to be written with the characters 獫狁. Indeed, the Western Zhou cases of the term do not normally contain the canine radical; see the inscriptions of the Duoyou ding 多友鼎 (2835), the Xijia pan 兮甲盤 (10174), the Guoji Zibai pan 虢季子白盤 (10173), etc. Still, the Bo Tangfu ding inscription offers one small piece of evidence that the association of the Xianyun with dogs may have preceded its manifestation in orthography.

205

characterization of the king and his relationship to the surrounding world.

3.2.1.4: Summary

The Mai fangzun , Tianwang gui , and Bo Tangfu ding inscriptions are sufficient evidence to allow the following statements: 59 A rite referred to in early inscriptions as da feng/li 大豐, or

“the Great Rite,” was carried out twice during the early Western Zhou period – once by King Wu and once by either King Cheng or King Kang. The king performed this rite, which involved the use of boats and, in at least one case, the shooting of birds. The rite was conducted in conjunction with ancestral offerings, as indicated by the use of the term rong in the Mai fangzun inscription and the description of offerings to King Wen in the Tianwang gui inscription.

A similar rite – captured in the inscription of the Bo Tangfu ding , though it is not called da feng/li in that inscription – occurred during the early phase of the middle Western Zhou, probably during the reign of King Mu. Like the previous instances, this rite involved the king moving about the biyong pond on a boat; as in the Mai fangzun case, the king was joined in the proceedings by an elite attendee in whose presence he shot animals and to whom he later showed material favor. While the Mai fangzun event involved the king shooting birds, however, the Bo

Tangfu ding event saw the king shoot a number of exotic land animals. This event may or may not have included ancestral offerings, depending on one’s interpretation of the character in the inscription often rendered hui ȼ and its objects.

59 This discussion opened by noting the appearance of feng in the introductory line of the He zun . If that appearance is taken to mean “rites” in general, as in the later sense of the term li 禮, it would be the only such case in the corpus of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions. It is, however, conceivable that the occurrence of feng in the He zun inscription refers to the performance of a separate instance of the da feng/li ritual described in the Mai fangzun and Tianwang gui inscriptions, missing the designation da , “great.” However, since the He zun inscription uses the event that it designates feng/li as a time marker rather than narrating it in detail, there is no way to compare it with those recorded in the Mai fangzun, Tian Wang gui, and Bo Tangfu ding inscriptions. It is therefore impossible to assert the identity of the events in question with any certainty. On those grounds, I have omitted it from the present discussion of da feng/li .

206

Per its association with the biyong pond and, in the case of the Tianwang gui , with directionality, the rite had a cosmological component, drawing a mimetic connection between the body of water on which it was conducted and the entirety of the known world. By adding animals as campaign spoils to the process, the Bo Tangfu ding rite intensified both the mimetic potential and the historical specificity of the rite, transforming it from a general materialization of the king’s military might into a direct reference to recent achievements.

3.2.2: Jitian/jinong 籍田/籍農 (“ploughing fields”) 60

The Western Zhou inscriptions record a single occasion when the king is said to have organized an agricultural rite. The event is recorded in the inscription of the Ling ding 令鼎

(2803), a vessel discovered in Ruicheng County, Shanxi, and dated by MWX to the reign of King

Zhao: 61

王大耤（藉）農于諆田，餳（觴）。王射，有（司）眔師氏、小子（會）射。 62 王歸自諆田，王（馭），溓仲 （僕）令眔奮先馬走，王曰：「令眔奮乃克至，余其舍女（汝）臣十63 家」。王至于溓宮，，令拜首，曰：「小子迺學。」令對揚王休。 The king greatly ploughed the land at the fields of Qi and feasted. 64 The king held archery, and the Supervisors, the Marshals, and the scions shot together. When the king returned from the fields of Qi, the king drove, and Zhai Zhong’s servants Ling and Fen went in front of the horses [i.e., as the king’s vanguard]. The king said, “Ling and Fen, if you acquit yourselves well [lit, “are able to arrive,”] I shall transfer to you ten households of servants.” 65 The king arrived at the palace of Zhai and was pleased. 66 Ling bowed and

60 I am indebted to Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 71, for bringing the existence of this rite to my attention. 61 JC 2803; MWX 97, 69-70. My reading of this inscriptions closely follows that in MWX . 62 The transcription of this character follows MWX , 70. 63 The AS database transcription has sa 卅, “thirty,” here. I follow MWX , 69-70, in reading this character as shi 十, “ten.” The additional marks to the sides of the character are probably relics of damage to either the inscription or the rubbing. 64 On the reading of shang 餳（觴）as “feasting,” see MWX , 70, n. 1. 65 I follow MWX’s reading of the preceding two lines; see MWX , 70, n. 3-4. I differ with Ma, however, in seeing Zhai Zhong’s name here as referring to the affiliation of Ling and Fen rather than indicating that the “Second Eldest of Zhai” himself took a hand in the driving. For the reading of pu 僕 as one who preceded the horses in a procession, see Liji , “Qu li,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1252; this passage is cited in ibid.

207

struck his head, saying, “The young son will study [this], then.” Ling praises the king’s beneficence in response.

The key phrase in consideration here is jinong 籍農; based on the syntax of the line, it must function as a verb phrase or verb-object combination meaning that the king “greatly ploughed the fields.” We may safely assume that the Zhou king did not regularly work as an agricultural laborer; the ploughing in question must have been ceremonial, although the syntax suggests that the king took a direct hand in the process. Additional group activities framed the king’s ploughing as a ceremonial action. The statement later in the inscription about the king’s return from Qi, the place where the ploughing was performed, confirms that the other activities mentioned at the beginning – namely, feasting and archery – also happened at Qi as part of the same overall event.

The situation seems to have been as follows: The king, along with a number of other ranking elites, traveled to Qi and performed a ceremonial ploughing of the fields. 67 Afterward, the king hosted feasting and archery, in which his aristocratic entourage participated. On the way back from the site designated for the ceremony, a group of people associated with the Zhai

溓 lineage took charge of the king’s transportation needs, likely because the return trip passed

66 MWX reads this character as xi 媐, which the Shuowen defines as “pleased”; see MWX , 70, n. 5. 67 Scholars regularly characterize the royal performance of ploughing as “symbolic”; see MWX , 70, n. 1; Yang Kuan, 217. Undoubtedly there is some truth to this, in that the furrows plowed by the king and/or by other aristocrats were intended not to accomplish the entire work of agriculture directly, but to describe the king as the source of sedentary agriculture as a phenomenon and the nourishment that it provided; the assertion of the Zhou royal house’s descent from Hou Ji 后稷 (“the Lord of Millet”) made the same argument. (For this tradition, see Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 111-3.) However, we cannot discount the possibility that the king’s personal involvement in the opening of the agricultural season was seen by some, at least, to have a genuine effect on the later growth of crops. Certainly encouraging this viewpoint would have been one of the goals of the practice described in the Ling ding inscription. I hesitate to use the word “symbolic” in this circumstance, as that term implies a less direct connection between the action performed and the action it was meant to indicate. Here, as far as we know, the king does not perform some other action that indexes the process of ploughing; he ploughs the soil himself, though undoubtedly not for long. His action exemplifies and initiates rather than symbolizes.

208

through the lineage’s territory. 68 Figures called Ling and Fen, subordinates of Zhai Zhong (the

“Second Eldest of Zhai”), rode out as the king’s vanguard, for the successful performance of which service the king promised a gift of ten households of servants ( chen shi jia 臣十家). The inscription is somewhat ambiguous about the recipient of the reward, employing only the term ru

汝, “you.” Given the size of the reward –– and the concomitant cost of its upkeep, my sense is that it was probably intended for the Zhai lineage as a whole rather than for Ling, Fen, or both.

Once the royal caravan arrived at the Zhai lineage headquarters, the king expressed his

satisfaction with the performance of Ling and Fen. 69 Ling had a chance to respond to this acknowledgement in person, as his expression of gratitude and admiration is recorded near the end of the inscription. It is possible that Ling may have received some other remuneration, either directly from the royal household or as a “trickle-down” gift from the lineage, that supported his commissioning of an inscribed bronze to commemorate the occasion; however, this cannot be confirmed.

On at least this one occasion, then, the king conducted a ceremonial ploughing event.

The inscriptions unfortunately offer little further evidence that this was a regular practice. One late Western Zhou inscription, that of the Zai gui (4255), however, records the appointment of its

commissioner to the office of Supervisor of Land ( situ 司土), with the understanding that he is to

“take official charge of the ploughing of fields” (guan si ji tian 官 [司]耤[藉]田): 70

68 A number of inscriptions of King Cheng’s reign record the activities of a figure called the Duke of Zhai or Duke Zhai (Zhaigong 溓公); see the Si ding 鼎 (2659), the Hou Chuo ding 厚趠鼎 (2730), and the two X ding  鼎 (2740-1). The further inscriptions of the Zhai Ji li 溓季鬲 (495), the Zhai Ji gui 溓季簋 (3978), and the Zhai Sufu ding 溓俗父鼎 (2466) confirm that the term designated a lineage as well as an individual. 69 On the question of gong as “offices” for individuals or lineages, see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 116-7. Li makes specific reference to the Zhai Gong in this argument. 70 JC 4255. It is difficult to date the Zai gui with exactitude, since it is known only from its record in Kaogutu 3.22- 3, the drawing in which is exceedingly rough. MWX dates the Zai gui to the reign of King Xiao (231), while Duandai assigns it to King Gong (175-6). Shirakawa suggests a late King Zhao-early King Mu dating based on the calligraphy of the inscription; see Shirakawa 20.110, 412-8. Here, however, I follow Daxi (which assigns the

209

71 隹（唯）正月乙巳，王各于大室，穆公入右  ，立中廷，北鄉（嚮），王曰： ，令女（汝）乍（作）（司）土（徒），官（司）耤（藉）田，易（賜） 72 女（汝）戠衣、赤巿、（鑾）旂、楚走馬，取 五寽（鋝），用事。拜首，對揚王休，用乍（作）（朕）文考寶，其子子孫孫永用。 During the first month, on the yisi day, the king entered the Great Hall. Duke Mu entered and acted as youzhe for Zai, standing in the center of the hall, facing north. The king said, “Zai, I command y ou to act as Supervisor of Land , taking official charge of the ploughing of fields. I award you a gathered garment , a red (?) kneepad , a flag with bells, a palfrey,73 and five lve of captured (?), for use in service. Zai bowed and struck his head, pr aising the king’s beneficence in response. I [he] thereby make a precious gui -tureen for my cultured deceased father. May [my] sons’ sons and grandsons’ grandsons eternally use [it].

Despite the clear interest of the Supervisor of Land in the management of agriculture in general, this statement is generally taken to refer to the royal ploughing rite rather than to the “ploughing of fields” in general. 74 Given the rarity of the term ji 籍 elsewhere in the inscriptions, I am inclined to agree with that inter pretation. 75 The close dates of the Ling ding and Zai gui inscriptions would then suggest a concerted, multilayered effort at the control of agricultural land through royally sponsored ritual, beginning probably with King Zhao and extending into the late

Western Zhou period.

3.2.2.1: Ritual ploughing in later texts

bronze to King Xuan – see vol. 3, 139 -40), the AS database, and Bureaucracy , p. 71, in dating the bronze to the late Western Zhou period. 71 The AS database offers the transcription  for this character. I follow the original JC entry (see JC 4255), as well as MWX , 231, and Bureaucracy , 348, in transcribing it as . 72 The transcription of this character follows that given in MWX , 231. 73 I take the term chu 楚 in the sense of “orderly, clear,” referring here to the horse’s gait. 74 Yang Kuan, Chen Mengjia, and Li Feng all express this view; see Yang Kuan, Xi Zhou shi , 269; MWX, 231, n. 2b; Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 91. 75 JC records a tota l of 4 occurrences of the term ji in the inscriptions, two of which appear above. One of the remaining occurrences (the Mibo Shi Ji gui 弭伯師耤簋 [4257] ) is a personal name. The other, in the Mu gui , is a likely misreading. Li Feng reads the character diffe rently; see Landscape and Power , 100-1. The use of ji in the Ling ding inscription, then, does not seem to be a repurposing of an otherwise common term to describe a ritual phenomenon. I am therefore to inclined to take its use in that inscription as the basis for understanding its meaning in the Zai gui inscription.

210

Both the Guoyu and the Lüshi chunqiu contain references to a ceremonial initial ploughing of the fields by the Zhou king or other ruler. 76 The most detailed account of the yili

rite appears in the “Zhou yu – shang” 周语上 chapter of the Guoyu , under the pretext of a

memorial submitted to the late Western Zhou King Xuan protesting its cancellation.

In his Xi Zhou Shi , Yang Kuan devotes a full chapter to the explication of this rite and his

vision of its role in the exploitation of the populace at large by the Western Zhou elite. 77 Yang

argues that the phrase jitian 籍 originally referred to fields held and worked in common at the

village level to provide emergency aid and support ritual offerings. As state-level organizations

emerged, he suggests, the fruits of these fields were diverted to support elite interests. The term

ji 籍 became a codeword for the organized exploitation of common labor by aristocrats, and the jitian or jili ceremony was the ritual framework through which that practice was justified and maintained. 78

Based on the Guoyu account, Yang offers a description of the rite in stages: its initial scheduling by royal officials; the hosting of a preliminary round of drinking, in which hierarchical relations between the participants were set; the formal performance of the rite itself, in which the king ploughed a single furrow, the next grade of aristocrats ploughed three, the next nine, and so on until commoners completed the work on the allotted space; a round of feasting after the rite’s completion; and, finally, an extensive examination of the work done and exhortation of the aristocracy to ensure the quality and completeness of work done. This last portion is the key to Yang’s argument, showing, as he argues, the severity with which the Zhou

76 Guoyu zhengyi , 62-73; Lüshi chunqiu jiaoshi, 2-14, 1711-7. 77 Yang Kuan, Xi Zhou shi , Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 2003, 268-82; cited in Bureaucracy , 71, n. 63. 78 Yang Kuan, 268-82, esp. 280-2.

211

elite arrogated the labor of the populace to support their interests. 79

Early though it may be when compared to the ritual books, the Guoyu chapter in all

likelihood still postdates the reign of King Xuan by several hundred years. 80 Its use as a source

on the Western Zhou calls for extreme caution, especially given that the earliest strata of

received texts are silent on the topic. 81 I would note two particular points of departure between

the Ling ding account and Yang’s description. First, no mention is made of ceremonial archery

in the Guoyu -based account, while that activity is explicitly recorded in the Ling ding inscription.

Second, there is no trace of a quality control phase – that is to say, an inspection of the ploughing and concomitant exhortation of responsible elites – in the Ling ding narrative. This difference is key, as such a process would have involved the praise or criticism of elites, would likely have been accompanied by awards, and would therefore spur the production of bronzes. If the king’s ploughing event had included such a phase, it would be of intrinsic interest to an elite audience and would therefore probably be mentioned in the inscription – as was the archery meet, despite the fact that Ling, if he took part in it, apparently did not distinguish himself. The fact that such

a phase is not mentioned suggests that it was not part of the sequence of events associated with

the ploughing rite.

Based on the Ling ding inscription, then, the focus of the Zhou king at the ceremonial

ploughing event was not on maintaining the quality of local agricultural activities. To

understand the motivations behind the rite, we may benefit from a comparison with similar

phenomena in other cultures.

79 Ibid., 268-70. 80 Early Chinese Texts cites Wei Juxian as dating the “Zhou yu” section of the Guoyu to 431 BCE; see Wei Juxian, Gushi yanjiu, Shanghai: Xinyue shudian, 1928, cited in Chang I-ren, William G. Boltz, and Michael Loewe, “Kuo yü,” in ECT , p. 264. 81 I have found nothing on jitian or jili in the Shangshu , the Yizhoushu , or the Zhouyi . The Shi refers briefly to ji in the “Zhousong” and Zheng Xuan’s commentary thereupon; see Yang Kuan, 277.

212

3.2.2.2: The coercive implications of ritual ploughing

The performance of special ceremonies by the ruler to mark the beginning of the planting

season is frequent among societies of a certain level of development. Apart from the early

Chinese case, Yang Kuan mentions the example of predynastic Egypt (ca. 3000 BCE), 82 citing

the famous Scorpion Macehead, which shows a king – identifiable from his depiction adorned

with the Crown of Upper Egypt, a standard iconographic element – clutching a hoe, potentially

in preparation to break ground ritually for irrigation. 83 We may add the example of the Inka,

who conducted a rite in which the ruler, his consort, and his entourage tilled the first field of the

season by way of ceremonially fighting and conquering the soil. 84

All three of these royal ploughing rites share an association with war. This connection is particularly well recorded for the Inka case, wherein songs of triumph were sung and the tilling of the earth was referred to as “disemboweling,” thanks to the existence of early ethnographic records from the Inka period. 85 The scene on the Scorpion Macehead includes bows, an element

symbolizing Egypt’s military opponents, and a number of dead birds that have been understood

to represent defeated populations. 86 The Ling ding inscription records that an archery

competition was held in conjunction with the jitian /jinong rite; as we have seen above in the

82 See the chronology in Bruce Trigger, “The Rise of Civilization in Egypt,” in The Cambridge History of Africa, vol. 1, 546-7. 83 Yang Kuan, Xi Zhou shi , 281. Yang describes but does not identify the Scorpion Macehead; on that item, see I.E.S. Edwards, “The Early Dynastic Period in Egypt,” in The Cambridge Ancient History I.2, Early History of the Middle East , Cambridge University Press, 1971, 3-10, 51-3, and Trigger, 521-4, 527. On Scorpion’s adornment with the Crown of Upper Egypt, see Edwards, 6, specifically. For the interpretation of its scene as a royal tilling/irrigation ritual, see Bruce Williams, Thomas J. Logan, and William J. Murnane, “The Metropolitan Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imagery Before Narmer,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46.4 (Oct. 1987), 265; for the suggestion that the depiction is symbolic, see Edwards, 6. 84 Brian S. Bauer, “Legitimization of the State in Inka Myth and Ritual,” American Anthropologist 98.2 (Jun 1996), 328-32. 85 Bauer, 328. In particular, Bauer cites Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, Royal Commentaries of the Incas and General History of Perú , H. V. Livermore, trans., Austin: University of Texas Press, 1989 (1609). 86 Edwards, 3-6; Williams et al., 265. It is notable that the combination of bow and bird connotes civil violence in both the Egyptian and Chinese contexts; see the discussion of the Mai fangzun above.

213

discussion of the feng/li rite and will discuss below, archery played a key symbolic role in the

ideology of Zhou royal power. These chronologically and geographically disparate regimes all

found that the king’s performance of the ceremonial role of “prime tiller” benefited from the

concurrent expression of royal military might.

Following Yang’s approach to the motivations behind the jitian /jinong rite, we might

suggest that in the Zhou case, the connection of the rite with military activities offered a view of

the consequences for any locals failing to conform to the elite program of labor appropriation by

which their former institution of shared agricultural labor, dedicated to providing for offerings

and the well-being of the unfortunate, had been subsumed. Commoners of the Western Zhou

period undoubtedly experienced frustration at the need to work on the behalf of others. 87 The existence of an institution such as Yang asserts is, however, impossible to prove. For the usual reasons, little evidence of non-elite ritual practices survives from the Western Zhou and before.

The records of the jitian /jinong rite derive from sources serving elite interests, however, and we can certainly consider the utility of the rite in the management of relations between aristocrats. In this context, the king’s performance of the plowing rite must have served as a reminder of the reach of royal authority and privilege, given, as is apparent from the inscription, that the host area of Qi belonged to the territory of a non-royal lineage. The ploughing rite recorded in the Ling ding inscription afforded the king an opportunity to keep up relations with the local elites controlling Qi. The act of ploughing itself, here as among the Inka, made a ritual argument for royal control of the local land and for the conception of the king as the starting point and source of agricultural activities. 88 The accompanying archery meet would have

87 The difficulties of labor exploitation are addressed elsewhere in pre-Qin sources; see, for example, Mencius 1.3, Shisanjing zhushu 2666-7. 88 The traditional construction of Zhou genealogy, in which the Zhou were said to be descended from Houji 后稷, “the Millet Lord,” makes a related argument. See Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 111-3.

214

reinforced the coercive implications of this argument, involving as it did a demonstration of the

martial abilities of royal representatives such as the Supervisors. 89

The king’s subsequent honoring of the representatives of the Zhai lineage provided a carrot to go with the stick, soliciting the loyalty of a particular local power group. The gift of thirty households of servants was quite substantial by Western Zhou standards and must also have materially strengthened the Zhai lineage, thus helping ensure that royal interests were represented in the area. By connecting this gift with the ploughing rite, the king created a motivation for local elites to “enroll” in the understanding of the Zhou state that the rite promoted, one in which the king enjoyed ultimate control over the land and was the necessary source – in other words, the “obligatory passage point” – of the resources it produced. 90

3.2.3: Zhiju 執駒 (“catching foals”)

In addition to the ploughing of the fields, the Zhou king also conducted a ceremonial

“catching of foals” ( zhiju 執駒). Several vessels discovered over the course of the second half of the twentieth century have furnished us with relatively rich records on this ceremony.

3.2.3.1: The foal-catching rite in the Western Zhou inscriptions

First and most distinctive among these was the Li juzun (6011), a middle Western Zhou

vessel found in Mei county, Shaanxi, and mentioned in the previous chapter (fig. 3.3, Appendix

2)..91 Its full inscription appears below:

89 The pairings of competitors in the Ling ding archery meet are unclear, but other meets pitted groups of royal partisans against local representatives; for a more detailed discussion, see the following chapter. 90 On the “obligatory passage point,” see Callon, 203-6. 91 See Bureaucracy, 153, n. 10; I am indebted to that source for bringing the foal-catching rite to my attention. MWX dates the vessel to the reign of King Yi; see MWX, 189. The appearance of Marshal Ju in the events recorded problematizes this dating; see Bureaucracy , 231, n. 50; Shaughnessy, Sources , 249, n. 62 (note that Shaughnessy

215

隹（唯）王十又二月，辰才（在）甲申，王初執駒于 ，王乎（呼）師豦召（詔） ，王親旨（詣），駒易（賜）兩，拜首曰：王弗望（忘）（厥）舊宗小子，皇身。曰：王倗下，不（丕）其則，邁（萬）年保我邁（萬）宗。 曰：余其敢對揚天子之休，余用乍（作）朕文考大中（仲）寶 彝。曰：其邁（萬）年世子孫孫永寶之。 It was the king’s twelfth month; the time was the jiashen day, [when] the king first performed the catching of foals at An. 92 The king called on Marshal Ju to summon Li, and the king personally acknowledged Li and awarded him two foals. Li bowed and struck his head, saying, “The king does not forget the young scion of his old ancestral line, but honors Li himself.” 93 Li said, “The king is friendly to his subordinates. May he then for ten thousand years greatly protect our ten thousand zong !” Li said, “May I dare to respond by praising the beneficence of the Son of Heaven. I therewith make a precious sacrificial vessel for my cultured deceased father Da Zhong.” Li said, “May [my] generations of sons and grandsons’ grandsons for ten thousand years eternally treasure it.”

Unfortunately, no concrete details are provided on the catching of foals itself. Presumably, the ceremony involved the corralling of the newest colts in the royal herds and, possibly, their breaking to the harness. 94 As with the spring plowing rite, the king’s role in the catching of foals was clearly demonstrative; others must have c arried out the bulk of the actual work of catching and breaking horses. 95 The ceremony provided an opportunity, however, for the king to

refers to the above vesse l as the Tuan juzun ). The vessel probably dates to no later than the reign of King Gong. Zhu Fenghan has suggested a King Mu dating; see “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” paper presented at the conference “Ancient Chinese Bronz es from the Shouyang Studio and Elsewhere: An International Conference Commemorating Twenty Years of Discoveries,” Nov. 5 -7, 2010, 14. The unique appearance of the vessel makes it difficult to situate in st andard typologies. 92 Li Feng cites the discovery of the Zhong Jiang ding (2191), commissioned by a king for a certain Zhong Jiang 仲姜, as further evidence of royal activity in this area in Mei county, Shaanxi; see Bureaucracy , 153, n. 11. Yang Kuan feels instead that it indicates the performance of the f oal-catching on the shores ( an 岸) of the biyong pond; see Yang Kuan, “’Zhiju’ de lizhi,” in Xi Zhou shi , 828-9. 93 The character  is problematic. Ma suggests a phonetic connection with hui 輝; see MWX , 190, n. 5. The meaning of huang 皇, however, is clear; in the translation, I have treated the two as a compound phrase. 94 This was the meaning of the phrase in later texts; see below. Given the importance of chariot warfare in the Zhou military model, one might expect that the royal house would have hosted s ome sort of equestrian or charioteering competition. However, as is shown below, depictions of the performance of archery in the inscriptions are quite explicit about the competitive aspect, naming the individuals involved and even, in one case, describin g the award won by the victor (see the Zhabo gui 柞伯簋 [NA0076]). Given the absence of named competitors in the Li juzun inscription, it seems unlikely that the “foal -catching” it describes had a strong participatory element. 95 Indeed, the diagnosis of the foal-catching as a rite relies, I hold, on the assumption that the king’s performance of such a relatively menial activity must have been symbolic. I believe that this assumption is correct in this case.

216

distribute resources and prestige through the established network of Zhou aristocratic kinship.

As noted in the first chapter, Li, the commissioner of the inscription and recipient of two foals

from the king, claims a direct connection of kinship with the Zhou king himself and phrases his

thanks in a way that suggests that the gift fulfilled an expectation of royal patronage. 96 Li’s call for royal protection of the ten thousand zong 宗 suggests that in the context of the ceremony, at

least, Li already conceived of the zong as the basic unit of Zhou elite society.

Li evidently placed special importance on the nature of the king’s gift or on the context in which he received it – so much so that he made the unusual choice to cast the vessel commemorating it in the realistically molded shape of a horse.97 Given this fact, considering the nature of his gift, and noting that the king summoned Li through the intermediary Marshal Ju rather than calling him directly, it seems likely that Li himself was involved in the care, training, or use of horses and that the gift he received from the king in the Li juzun inscription was a

reward for his performance during the foal-catching rite. If true, this raises further questions

about the relationship between the developing ritual apparatus of the Zhou and the royal kinship

group.

The excavations at Zhangjiapo, Fufeng county, Shaanxi in the 1980s uncovered a set of

three vessels with identical inscriptions, all recording a second occurrence of the foal-catching

rite: 98

隹（唯）三年五月既生霸壬寅，王才（在）周，執駒于滆，王乎巂召達，王易（賜）達駒，達拜（稽）首，對 （揚）王休，用乍（作）旅盨。

The appearance of the term in the Zhouli (see below) may have contributed to its interpretation as a type of ceremony among scholars, though it bears mentioning that, in that text, the term appears in conjunction with the name of an offering rather than as a ceremony name in its own right. 96 On Li’s membership in the Shan lineage and his possible relationship to the royal house, see chapter 1, note 42. 97 Vessels molded in realistic shapes were not, by and large, the norm for any point in the Western Zhou period. 98 Zhangjiapo , 310-1; Zhang Changshou, “Lun Jingshu tongqi – 1983-1986 nian Fengxi fajue ziliao zhi er,” Wenwu 1990.7, 32-35.

217

It was the third year, the fifth month, the jishengba moon phase, the renyin day. The king was at Zhou. [He] conducted the catching of foals at the Li 滆 Residence. The king called on Sui Yi to summon Da. The king gave Da a foal. Da bows and strikes his head, praising the king’s beneficence in response. [He] therewith makes a portable xu -vessel.

Zhu Fenghan has suggested the dating of these vessels, known collectively as the Da xu 達盨

(NA0692-4), to the reign of King Xiao, based on calendrical criteria; this dating is in concert

with general knowledge about the use of vessels of the xu type. 99 In addition to providing evidence of the continued practice of foal-catching, the inscription offers us a few new tidbits of information on the circumstances of the rite. It records the time of year when the rite was performed – probably late spring, judging from its assignment to the fifth month. It informs us that the venue of the rite, the “Li Residence” ( liju 滆居), fell within the overall location of Zhou; this means in turn that the Li Residence was seen as a facility or a sub-site rather than a location in its own right. But two commonalities between the inscriptions are perhaps the most significant points: first, that the king made contact with the vessel commissioner through an intermediary who “summoned” the honoree; 100 and second, that the commissioner was rewarded with a foal, presumably one of those caught in the process. Despite the different location of performance, then, and the relative lack of detail about the actual process of catching foals, there was a degree of continuity between the processes of patronage and reward associated with the Li juzun and Da xu foal-catching events.

It has been suggested that Da was the name of Jingshu 井叔, the occupant of the tomb

from which the Da xu were recovered. 101 It so happens that the unusual inscription of the Yi zhi

99 “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 14. This conforms to the Zhangjiapo excavators’ dating of the tomb to their period 3, encompassing the reigns of Kings Yih and Xiao; see Zhangjiapo , 368. Generally speaking, bronze xu are confined to the latter half of the Western Zhou dynasty; see Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 433-6. 100 On this intermediary, see the discussion of the Zuoce Wu he below. 101 See Yang Kuan, “’Zhiju’ de lizhi”; Zhang Changshou, “Lun Jingshu,” 33.

218

觶 (6516) records an appointment ceremony in which a Jingshu serves as the youzhe to a figure called Yi , the same name borne by the sui 巂 in the Da xu foal-catching event. 102 That

event took place in the third year of the reign of King Xiao, according to Zhu Fenghan; the Yi zhi

inscription does not contain a year-record, but it has been dated to the reign of King Yih, though

not by all. 103 If the Yi zhi is in fact a King Yih-era vessel, it is entirely possible that the Yi mentioned in the Da xu inscription was the commissioner of the Yi zhi , and in turn that the

Jingshu that served as youzhe at Yi’s appointment was the Da whom Yi later summoned to receive a foal from the king. 104 If that is the case, as I suspect it is, then the two vessels provide

us with a rare glimpse into relations of reciprocity between non-royal elites at work beneath the

surface of royal expressions of patronage.

One more inscription directly mentions the process of foal-catching. The Zuoce Wu he 作冊

吳盉, a vessel in a private collection in Hong Kong, has recently come to scholars’ attention thanks to discussions by Zhu Fenghan and Edward Shaughnessy. 105 The dating of this vessel is

distinctly problematic. Its high year-count would seem only to accommodate datings to the

reigns of King Mu or King Xuan. 106 Though I am less than persuaded of the possibility of exact

102 Unusual in that it is one of the few appointment inscriptions containing the phrase mieli ; see chapter 4, note 23. 103 On the dating of the Yi zhi , see Appendix 2, table 4.3. 104 Zhang Changshou, “Lun Jingshu,” 33. 105 “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi”; Xia Hanyi, “Cong Zuoce Wu he zai kan Zhou Mu Wang zaiwei nianshu ji niandai wenti,” in Xin chu qingtongqi yu Xi Zhou lishi , 52-5. The character choice in the transcription appearing here follows Shaughnessy’s except where noted; I have added punctuation and glosses for some of the more commonly recognized character readings. 106 Zhu Fenghan suggests the option of King Li as well, though he eliminates it on calendrical grounds; see “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 15. Following the chronology adopted by Sources , xix, and shared by Bureaucracy and by this work, however, a King Li dating is not possible. Shaughnessy follows King Mu option, based at least in part on the identity of Zuoce Wu with the figure of the same name and title who commissioned the Zuoce Wu fangyi (9898); see Xia Hanyi, “Cong Zuoce Wu,” 53. (Shaughnessy assigns the Wu fangyi to King Yih. MWX agrees with this, suggesting identity of the commissioner with the “Interior Scribe Wu” [Neishi Wu 內史吳] mentioned in the Shi Hu gui inscription; see MWX , 246. Li Feng supports the identification as well; see Bureaucracy , p. 76.) Zhu Fenghan opposes the King Mu dating based on a calendrical conflict with the date format of the Xian gui ; he finds King Xuan to be the only acceptable dating based on a combination of calendrical criteria and comparison with the ornamentation of other bronzes. See “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue

219

calendrical dating for the Western Zhou period, I am inclined to favor Zhu Fenghan’s suggestion

of a KingXuan dating, suggestion based on his comparison of the décor of the he with that of

such vessels as the Du Bo xu 杜伯盨 (4448-52) and the Shanfu Ke xu 善夫克盨 (4465). 107

Certainly the narrative of the Zuoce Wu he inscription is quite close to those of the Li juzun and

Lai xu inscriptions; however, descriptions of the appointment ritual from the middle and late

Western Zhou periods show similar consistency. 108 If Zhu is correct, then the Zuoce Wu he offers us evidence that the ritual catching of foals by the Zhou king continued into the late

Western Zhou period. 109

Again, beyond the significance of its possible datings, the Zuoce Wu he inscription adds

some details in its description of the foal-catching event; it thus appears here in its entirety:

隹（唯）卅年四月既生霸壬午，王在（在），執駒于南林。初執駒，王乎巂  召作冊吳立唐門。王曰，“易（賜）駒。”吳拜稽首，受駒以出。吳敢對揚天子不（丕）顯休，用作叔姬般（盤）盉。 It was the thirtieth year, the fourth month, the jisiba moon phase, the renwu day. The king was at (?). 110 The catching of foals was held at the Southern Forest of (?). When the catching of foals was first 111 performed, the king called on Sui He(?) 112 to summon

you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 12-5. 107 For Zhu Fenghan’s dating of the bronze, see the above note. The dating of the Zuoce Wu he cannot be completely resolved based on our current evidence. To my mind, however, the issue as it stands boils down to whether it is more likely that two people bore the title-name combination “Document Maker Wu” over the course of the Western Zhou, or that a vessel produced during the reign of King Mu bore decoration characteristic of late Western Zhou bronzes. Given that there are confirmed examples in which a Western Zhou lineage member occupied an official post previously held by his ancestors (on which see Bureaucracy, 192-9), and given also that the decoration of King Mu-era vessels is generally quite distinctive (ibid., 37), I find the former option to be more likely. 108 Compare, for example, the inscription of the Li fangzun , cited by Bureaucracy , 105, n. 17, as one of the earliest appointment inscriptions, with that of the Song ding , translated on the same page (105-6) and dating probably to King Xuan (see Bureaucracy , 105, n. 19; see also MWX , p. 302). The process narrated is remarkably similar despite the chronological separation of the bronzes. 109 “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 14. That is not to say, however, that there may not have been interruptions in the practice. An antiquarian quality has been observed in some late Western Zhou bronze vessels (see Jessica Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” in Cambridge History, p. 439); there is no reason that this aesthetic may not have extended to ritual practices as well. 110 Zhu Fenghan notes the appearance of this place-name in the inscription of the San Shi pan 散氏盤 (10176); see ibid., 13. 111 Zhu Fenghan reads this character as yi 衣 and glosses it as cu 卒; see “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan

220

Document Maker Wu to stand at the Tang Gate. 113 The king said, “Give [Wu] a foal.” Wu bowed and struck his head, took the foal, and left. Wu dares in response to praise the great and brilliant beneficence of the Son of Heaven, therewith making a basin-ewer 114 for Shu Ji.

The catching of foals at which Document Maker Wu was rewarded occurred not at the site of

either of the previous examples, but at a third location called ; it would seem that the ceremony moved from place to place, perhaps to allow the king to distribute the privilege (or burden) of hosting between different interest groups. The party on whom the king called to summon the reward recipient bore the title sui 巂; this was so in the Da xu case but not the Li

juzun case, in which Marshal Ju did the honors. Perhaps most interestingly, the inscription

specifies that Wu received the foal right away rather than as a later disbursement, taking it with

him as he left; 115 this may suggest that this instance of the ceremony was conducted in a location

suitable for the keeping of livestock. Finally, I would draw attention to the fact that the

ceremony was conducted in the thirtieth reign-year, suggesting that the king was of relatively

advanced age at the time. Zhu has suggested that the king’s catching of foals was probably

de ji jian tongqi,” 13. The distinction is between whether the line states that the king “first” or “initially” caught foals, or that the following events occurred when the catching of foals was over. Either viewpoint is supportable, the former based on comparison with the Li juzun inscription, the latter on the internal logic of the inscription itself. 112 The intermediary responsible for summoning the grantee carries the title sui 巂 in both the Da xu and Zuoce Wu he inscriptions. Zhu Fenghan suggests that this term referred to a type of body-servant or high-ranking valet for the Zhou king; see “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 14. In this regard Zhu adduces Li Xueqin’s argument in “Shang mo jinwen zhong de zhiguan ‘xie,’” in Shihai zhenji – qingzhu Meng Shikai xiansheng qishi sui wenji , Xin Shiji chubanshe, 2006. Since, as Zhu notes (14), the only Western Zhou inscriptions containing the title are those of the Zuoce Wu he and the Da xu , both of which describe the catching of foals, it is worth considering whether the Zhou may not have used the term to refer to a specific role in the foal- catching process. 113 The term tang is quite rare in the Western Zhou inscriptions; according to the AS database, it appears in only two inscriptions of Western Zhou date (the Bo Tangfu ding , discussed above, and the Tang Zhong Duo hu 唐仲多壺 [9572]). In both of those inscriptions, it serves as a name element, and so I reluctantly read it in the same way here, taking tang men 唐門 to mean “the gate of the Tang [lineage hall].” How and why the Tang lineage might have been involved in the foal-catching process I cannot explain. 114 The phrase 般（盤）盉 ban (pan) he refers to the use of he -ewers (like the Zuoce Wu he ) and pan -basins together for washing one’s hands; see MWX , 179, n. 3. 115 Zhu Fenghan draws attention to this detail in “Xi Zhou qingtong zhongqi: Zuoce Wu he,” 4.

221

symbolic. 116 The late reign-year of the Zuoce Wu he inscription lends some oblique support to that assumption.

Since, as the above inscriptions show, the catching of foals was performed with some regularity, one might expect that the royal house would establish some physical infrastructure to support it. One source hints at this possibility. The inscription of the Ninth-year Qiu Wei ding

九年衛鼎 (2831) records the king’s receipt of an emissary of Mei’ao, a figure known also from the inscription of the Guaibo gui (4331), at a location called the “Foal Palace:”

隹（唯）九年正月既死霸庚辰，王才（在）周駒宮，各廟。眉敖者膚卓事見于王… It was the ninth year, the first month, the jisiba moon phase, the day gengchen . The king was at the Foal Palace at Zhou and entered the temple. The emissary of Mei’ao Zhefu Zhuo was presented to the king…117

Li Feng has suggested that the “Foal Palace” ( Jugong 駒宮) mentioned here might have been dedicated to the ritual catching of foals mentioned in the Li juzun inscription. 118 Without

additional material connecting the location directly with the catching of foals, this cannot be

stated with certainty; in fact, the available inscriptional evidence suggests that different

occurrences of the catching were held in different locales. However, the general habits of use of

the place-name suffix gong 宫 in the Western Zhou inscriptions suggest that the Foal Palace

probably did play host to events associated with horsemanship and/or charioteering. 119

3.2.3.1: The foal-catching rite and the management of horseflesh in early China

116 “Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi,” 14. 117 I follow Ma Chengyuan’s reading of the excerpted lines here; see MWX 203, 136-8, esp. 137. The Ninth-year Qiu Wei ding is a dating standard for the reign of King Gong; see Sources , 111. 118 Bureaucracy , 162. 119 The “Study Palace” ( Xuegong 学宫), for example, was actually used for the training of youths; see the inscription of the Jing gui (4273).

222

Like the Shang before them, the Zhou practiced chariot warfare – possibly on a much

greater scale than the Shang, in fact. 120 Inscriptions such as that of the Duoyou ding (2835)

confirm that the Zhou fielded large numbers of chariots on campaign, as did some of their

opponents. 121 The possession and use of horses was thus a key element of elite military

endeavor and, by extension, of elite status among the Zhou. The king’s distributing of horses to

client elites was not simply an expression of material patronage; it was also an arbitration of

status-group membership, a way to mark individuals as participating in the upper echelons of

Zhou elite culture.

By celebrating the king’s role in the husbandry of horses –the most important resource in

the pursuit of the Zhou elite style of warfare, along with bronze – the catching of foals

emphasized the provision, rather than the demonstration, of military strength. 122 As a counterpoint to the spring plowing rite, the catching of foals argued for the king’s status as the ultimate source of all resources, both agricultural (as depicted in the spring plowing rite) and military (as depicted in the catching of foals). Naturally, to justify that status, the king had to distribute the resources in question; and indeed, the inscriptions mentioning the catching of foals all commemorate royal gifts of foals to lesser elites. The regular performance of the ceremony would have promoted its traditionalization and lent the vision of the king as resource arbiter a sense of inevitability and “inherited value,” to borrow Baudrillard’s term. 123

The relationship between the catching of foals and the overall management of horseflesh

120 On the amount of chariots found at Zhou vs. Shang sites, see Shaughnessy, “Historical Perspectives on the Introduction of the Chariot into China,” HJAS 48.1 (June 1998), 189-237, esp. 190-1, 198-9. 121 See the translation and discussion of the Duoyou ding in Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 147-50. 122 This is not to say that the Zhou had no rites that overtly celebrated the exercise of military prowess. The Mai fangzun (JC: 6015) inscription cited above, for example, records the participation of the new ruler of the state of Xing in a rather transparent mimetic enactment of the king's military might. Other rites – in particular, the she 射 /archery competition and the liao 燎/presentation of ears – fulfilled this role in a more participatory fashion; see the relevant sections in the preceding and following chapters. 123 Baudrillard, The System of Objects, 88-9.

223

in the Zhou state is still vague. Given the frequency with which chariot-and-horse teams appear

as royal gifts in the inscriptions,124 the Zhou kings must have required a ready supply of horses;

certainly, the existence of the Foal Palace shows that they created some infrastructure to support

such a supply. It is possible that royal herds were kept at all of the places in which foal-catching

ceremonies were held – An  in Mei county, Li 滆, and  – and that their management provided occasions for the Zhou king to acknowledge subordinate elites and confer gifts. Since each foal-catching took place at a different location, however, it is equally possible that the herds producing the foals were maintained by local lineages rather than the royal house and that the king arrogated some or all of them for his own purposes, be they personal use or redistribution to favored recipients.

The king’s performance of the foal-catching rite would then appear in much the same light as the example of the ploughing rite examined above – as a ritual effort to figure the Zhou king as an “obligatory passage point” in local production activities, to remind local elites of the reach of royal authority, and to renew and maintain relations with valued allies on the king’s terms. Although the foal-catching rite positioned the king as the ultimate source of equine resources, however, its regular employment of an intermediary representative admitted indirect trajectories of patronage. Thus, alongside the case of the king’s present of foals to Li, which appeared (at least to Li himself) as an expression of favor and fulfillment of obligations to royal kin, we have the Da xu case, in which a lineage potentate was called to his royal reward by the same functionary whose official appointment he sponsored under a previous king.

It should be mentioned that the term zhiju 執駒 appears a few times in later received texts,

124 See Huang Ranwei, Yin Zhou qingtongqi shangci mingwen yanjiu , Hong Kong: Longmen, 1978, 173-84, 205-6 fig. 26; Chen Hanping, Xi Zhou ceming zhidu yanjiu , Shanghai: Xuelin, 1986, 239-50.

224

mainly in the ritual compendia. 125 The “Xia guan – Sima” 夏官司馬 (“Summer Offices –

Master of Horse”) chapter of the Zhouli discusses it under the sections on the xiaoren 校人 and souren 廋人:

春祭馬祖。執駒。夏祭先牧。頒馬攻特。秋祭馬社。臧僕。冬祭馬步。獻馬講馭夫。 In the spring, [he] made offerings to the Horse Ancestors and caught the foals ( zhiju ). In the summer, he made offerings to the Former Herdsman and sought out horses for training in specialties. In the fall, he made offerings at the Altar of Earth of the Horses 126 and [selected?] good servants. 127 In the winter, he made offerings to the Horse Gait, 128 presented horses, and lectured the drivers. 129

廋人掌十有二閑之政。教以阜馬佚特。教駣。攻駒。及祭馬祖。祭閑之先牧。及執駒散馬耳。圉馬。 The souren (“Searcher”) held responsibility for the governance of the twelve enclosures. With instruction, he made the horses abundant and broke them to the specialties; 130 he instructed the three-year-olds and trained the foals; 131 he made offerings to the Horse Ancestors and the Former Herdsmen of the enclosures; also, he caught the foals, loosened the horses’ ears, and stabled the horses. 132

This study cannot rely on the Sanli for evidence corroborating the existence or the details of a particular rite, as one of its main goals is to establish a baseline understanding of Western Zhou ritual to which the later ritual texts can be compared. As linguistic sources, however, the later

125 Specifically, the phrase is found twice in the Zhouli , once in the Da dai liji , and once in the “Da qu” chapter of the Mozi ; in the latter, it forms part of a semantic argument with no contextual information of use here. See Shisanjing zhushu , 860-1; Wang Pingzhen, Da Dai liji jiegu , Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983, 36-7; Zhang Chunyi, Mozi jijie, Shanghai: Shijie shuju, 1936, 383. Ma Chengyuan notes the Zhouli occurrences in his gloss of the inscription; see MWX , 190, n. 1a. 126 The traditional commentary describes the ma she 馬社 as “the first to ride horses”; see Shisanjing zhushu , p. 860. 127 Zheng Xuan glosses pu 僕, “servants,” as “the servants that drive the Five Roads’: see ibid. 128 The “Horse Gait” or “Horse Step” ( Ma Bu 馬步), the commentary suggests, was a spirit that brought harm upon horses; see ibid. 129 Shisanjing zhushu , 860. 130 Following the traditional commentary in reading yi 佚 as yi 逸, meaning, as the commentary puts it, 用之不使甚勞，安其血氣也 (“It is that using them would not require extreme labor; to calm the qi of their blood”). See Shisanjing zhushu , 861. 131 The Shuowen identifies 駣 as three-year-old horses versus ju 駒 as two-year-olds; see Shuowen , 461. The traditional commentary notes this distinction as well; see Shisanjing zhushu , 861. 132 Shisanjing zhushu , 861.

225

texts are of some value in corroborating the basic assumption that the phrase zhiju 執駒,

“catching foals,” referred to the breaking off of young foals from the herds for training. The first passage above, in particular, suggests an understanding of zhiju as the first point in the life cycle of the horse as work animal. The “Xia xiao zheng” chapter of the Da dai liji offers further detail on the understanding of the phrase in its time:

執陟攻駒。執也者，始執駒也。執駒也者，離之去母也。陟，升也，執而升之君也。攻駒也者，教之服車數舍之也。 “To catch the advance and train the foal.” “To catch” is to first catch the foal. To first catch the foal is to separate it from its mother. “To advance [it]” is to present it upward; it is caught and presented to the ruler. To train the foal” is to teach it to serve (i.e., pull) a cart and repeatedly to abandon (?) it. 133

Its gloss corroborates the idea that the process called “foal-catching” involved removing the foals from their mothers’ care and entering them into training, as well as the assumption that by the later Han, at least, the term referred to the carrying out of this process on a ruler’s, if not the royal, behalf. 134

The use of the term zhiju in the inscriptions, then, seems to conform well with its

meaning in the later ritual texts as far as the basic details go. This is hardly surprising, as the

exigencies of large-scale animal husbandry probably changed little over the six hundred years or

so between Li’s era, for example, and the advent of the Han. It is important, however, not to

read too much into the similarity. The Zhouli passages pose a particular danger of this, with their

detailed description of the ritual calendar of horse husbandry and their frequent references to

133 Da Dai liji jiegu, 36-7. The transcribed excerpt is taken from the CHANT database. However, the phrase 陟，升也 does not appear in the CHANT version; I have added it in order to conform with the text as given in Da Dai Liji jiegu . The Da Dai Liji is probably a later text even than the Sanli ; see Jeffrey Riegel, “Ta Tai Li chi,” in ECT, 456-9, and on the “Xia xiao zheng” chapter, 458-9, as well as Benedykt Grynpas, Les écrits de Tai l’Ancien et le petit calendrier des Hia , Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient A. Maisonneuve, 1972, cited therein. Its value here is mainly as a gloss of the phrase in the Zhouli . 134 On the later Han date for the Da Dai Liji , see Riegel, 456.

226

supernatural forces associated with horses. None of these supernatural figures (the Horse

Ancestors [ Mazu 馬祖], the Former Herdsman [ Xian Mu 先牧], the Earth Altar of Horses [ Ma

She 馬社], and the Horse Gait [ Ma Bu 馬步]) are mentioned in the JC bronze inscriptions, nor, to my knowledge, do they feature in any pre-Qin or Han-era text other than the Zhouli .135 Neither

am I aware of any evidence that the Zhou venerated horses in a capacity beyond their value as

prestige goods, military tools, and markers of elite status. The figures in the Zhouli passage

portray a peculiar understanding of the ritual institutions associated with horse husbandry that

cannot be verified as valid for the Western Zhou period – nor, for that matter, for any period up

through the Han dynasty. Such potential dangers should be borne in mind when considering the

applicability of the Sanli and other later texts to the study of Western Zhou phenomena. 136

3.3: Conclusion: figuring and refiguring the Zhou king

Latour identifies four points of entry for inquiry into the formation of groups: the designation of spokespeople to carry out the ongoing work of group definition; the specification of “out-groups” to contrast with the “in-group” being formed; the demarcation of boundaries distinguishing the group from other threatening identities; and the involvement of social scientists in establishing and perpetuating a definition for the group. 137 This last type of “trace”

he associates with developed societies; we may leave it behind for now, although it may be of

some use in characterizing Spring and Autumn-era approaches to the ritual component of Zhou

135 A search of the CHANT and AS databases produced no other results for these phrases. 136 The Zhouli assertions on the timing of and party responsible for the rite should also be addressed. The Li juzun inscription states that the catching of foals took place in the king’s twelfth month; this dating method is unfortunately ambiguous as to the timing of the rite within the year. As for the responsible parties, neither Marshal Ju nor Li verifiably held the position of sima 司馬. The inscription of the Li fangyi (9900), however, does record Li’s appointment to a position with authority over the Three Supervisors of the Six Armies; this would mean that Li had some sima as subordinates. On the connection between this bronze, the Li juzun , and the Shi Ju bronzes, see Shaughnessy, Sources , 249 n. 62; Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 231, n. 50. 137 Latour, Reassembling the Social , 30-3.

227

identity. 138 The former three, however, are of specific interest to the current discussion. After

the Zhou conquest of Shang, the new royal house leveraged its access to ritual techniques in an

effort to promote a coherent group identity among its adherents; the previous two chapters have

explored this process in detail. To maintain its position of ascendancy, however, the Zhou kings

sought also to distinguish themselves as spokespersons, to borrow Latour’s term, for the Zhou

elite group identity. The rites considered here may be understood as steps toward this goal; the

particulars thereof – especially those of the “Great Rite” – show traces of the royal house’s

efforts toward the second and third goals. 139 The pursuit of these goals required an ongoing

effort at the figuration of the Zhou king as a key actant in the narrative of the Zhou state; 140 the

traces of that effort have provided the material for this chapter.

Historical traditions emphasize that the Zhou kings rose to power at the head of a military

coalition of disgruntled peoples in response to oppression at the hands of a centralized, theocratic

authority. 141 The development of the Western Zhou repertoire of royal ritual framings conforms

well to this model. Rather than propitiating natural spirits, as is often seen in the records of

Shang rites in the oracle bone inscriptions, the ritual framings of the Zhou kings against the

surrounding world bore strong traces of military organization – even the single recorded instance

of the spring ploughing rite happened in conjunction with an archery meet – and argued for the

supremacy of human institutions over non-human forces (including land, animals, and non-Zhou

populations). The king appeared in them as a “first among equals;” he was characterized as

excelling at skills which everyone possessed or originating activities in which everyone took part.

138 See ibid., 34. 139 Ibid., 32. 140 On the figuration of actants, see Latour, Reassembling the Social, 52-4. Throughout this work, I unapologetically pursue a figuration of the Zhou royal house, and of the individual Zhou kings, as key agencies in the narrative of Western Zhou history, with discernible motivations. As justification, I would point out that, as portrayed in all surviving materials from the period, this figuration was of singular importance in Zhou elites’ conceptions of state and identity. 141 See “Mu shi” in Shangshu zhengyi , Shisanjing zhushu , 182-3.

228

Generally speaking, rites figuring the Western Zhou kings evoked specific geopolitical interests

inherent to the establishment of the infrastructure of Zhou power -- the founding of Chengzhou,

the control of the borders of Zhou territory, the counterbalancing of delegated authority over

outlying areas, the maintenance of control over the strategic chokepoint of Qi.

Outside the realm of ancestral offerings, 142 the bronze inscriptions record one ritual

technique used to frame the image of the early Western Zhou kings against the surrounding

world. This was the ceremonial boating called the da feng/li rite. Like many aspects of Zhou ritual, the kings inherited certain aspects of this practice from their Shang predecessors, particularly the habit of conducting archery on a body of water. The Zhou implementation of the practice, however, introduced several innovations that emphasized the mimetic aspects of royal boating and shooting. In particular, by staging the rite on the regularly shaped, cosmologically significant biyong or bichi pond, the Zhou kings made a statement about the extent of royal authority and its role in the new, post-Shang order. The rite simultaneously situated both the king and the performance site at the imagined center of the Zhou state, while emphasizing the king’s ability to reach to the bounds of that state and beyond. The addition of shooting to the ritual sequence reinforced its martial implications. Using specific animals associated with antagonistic border populations as targets drove home the portrayal of the king as military leader, bolstered the mimetic connection between the biyong pond and the area of Zhou control, and encouraged an understanding of Zhou royal adherents as “in-group” in contrast to sub-human

“out-groups” of border-dwellers.

The innovative effectiveness of the “Great Rite” lay in its formulation of the Zhou state

142 This is not to suggest that the da feng/li ceremony was completely divorced from the ancestral-ritual context; on the contrary, the Mai fangzun instance, for example, took place in conjunction with royal ancestral rituals, and depictions of the rite in the inscriptions of ancestral bronzes extended its efficacy into local contexts. The point is simply that the rhetorical effectiveness of the da feng/li process itself did not rely on reference to the world of ancestral spirits.

229

as a geographically delimited territory within which the king, assisted by elite followers,

exercised the power of life and death. This idea evidently took hold in both the governmental

and ritual strategies of the Zhou kings from the earliest stages of the period. Li Feng has noted

that, while the Zhou kings conceived of their state in territorial terms, their efforts to control it

consisted of the delegation of administrative functions to regional rulers, together with the

assumption that the king could if necessary carry out defensive military actions anywhere within

the overall territory of the state. 143 The rites conducted on the biyong pond neatly depict this

state of affairs, their scope restricted mainly to portraying the king’s ability to kill effectively in

any direction within the known world. Limitation of the activity of accompanying participants,

as depicted in the Mai fangzun inscription and Bo Tangfu ding inscriptions, ritually

counterbalanced the delegation of authority to figures such as the Marquis of Xing that was

inherent to the composition of the early Zhou state. The ritual shooting of animals by the king in

the Mai fangzun inscription was an effort to remind participants of the reach of royal military

power beyond the king’s limited range of direct administrative control.

Cases of the da feng/li rite reach across the early Western Zhou and into the early stages

of the middle Western Zhou, with the last occurrence dating probably to the reign of King Mu.

Further records, however, portray the introduction of new ritual models of the place of the king

in the world around the beginning of the middle Western Zhou. The first case of the ritual

plowing of the earth by the king, and the only case of which a definite record survives, happened

probably during the reign of King Zhao. Either King Gong’s or King Mu’s saw the first

recorded case of the zhiju , or catching of foals, a ceremonial tradition repeated under later kings.

Between them, these two rites moved toward a figuration of the Zhou king as the source and

arbiter of the key resources of the Zhou state, both agricultural and military; they framed the king

143 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 287-8.

230

as foundation as well as center of the state.

Though the new rites of the late-early and middle Western Zhou period portrayed the

king as a fundamental, indispensable source of – an “obligatory passage point” for – vital

production activities, evidence from the Da xu and Yi zhi inscriptions shows that they could also

afford room for patronage relations originating outside, if still flowing through, the royal

house. 144 In all likelihood, similar relations circulated under the surface of official appointment

rituals, royally sponsored archery meets, and other ritual activities claiming the Zhou king as

arbiter but requiring intermediaries for their completion. By itself, this does not necessarily

imply the subversion of royal authority. A “ruler” as a political individual is always a figuration

of agencies, and to maintain its integrity, that figuration can and must endure constant

reformulation in order to incorporate competing and concurrent visions of the group. 145

Figuration also requires exclusion, however; 146 and if the formulated identity of the king can

incorporate outside interests, then those interests can likewise incorporate elements of the

formulation of royal authority to advance their interests. By emphasizing the qualitative

distinction between the king and other Zhou elites, the ritual refiguring of the king as source and

arbiter of production activities simultaneously created powerful new motivations for enrollment

in the Zhou state identity and opened up the possibility of a Zhou elite identity separate from the

ruling house. 147

The assignment of responsibility for “spring plowing” in the Shi Zai gui inscription, and

144 On the “obligatory passage point,” see Callon, 203-6. 145 On the figuration of agencies, and in particular on individual identity as such, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 52-8. Group identity is of course inherent in the figuration of rulership, in that a ruler is defined in terms of his or her relationship to subjects. The ruler is both the epitome of a group identity and the one person who can never be part of it, a sentiment expressed in the early Chinese expressions guaren 寡人, “the lonely man,” and wo/yu yi ren 我/余一人, “I, the solitary man” (for the latter of which, see first the inscription of the Da Yu ding [2837]). 146 Latour draws an analogy between the postulation of anti-groups as part of the performance of groups and the denial of agencies as part of the figuration of other agencies; see Reassembling the Social , 56. 147 On the concept of “enrollment” ( interessement ), see Callon in Law, 206-11.

231

the existence of a “Foal Palace” as seen in the Ninth-year Qiu Wei ding inscription, show that the

broadening of the Zhou kings’ repertoire of framing rituals accompanied efforts to establish

institutional control over the production activities with which they were associated. Over the

course of the middle Western Zhou period, changes in the political and military situation

changed the priorities of the royal house, motivating the Zhou kings to intensify their control

over various aspects of state operation. 148 The introduction of the ploughing rite and the catching

of foals formed part of a multifaceted intensification of control over multiple aspects of the

operation of the Zhou state. In addition to the addition of these new rites framing the king

against the background of the natural world, this process drove further changes in the ritual

manifestations of patronage, recognition, and reward. The following chapter will characterize

those changes.

148 On the substantial political changes made to the state during the middle Western Zhou period, see Bureaucracy , 34-8.

232

CHAPTER 4 ENROLLING ALLIES: REOGNITION, REWARD, AND THE RITUAL INSTANTIATION OF PATRONAGE

The king said, “Hey! Elder lords of our allied states; governors of affairs; Supervisors of Land, Supervisors of Horse, and Supervisors of Works; lesser campaigners; Marshals; chiefs of a thousand men, and chiefs of a hundred men; and men of Yong, Shu, Jiang, Mao, Wei, Lu, Peng, and Pu. Raise your halberds, line up your shields, and stand up your spears. I will make a pledge!”

Shangshu, “ Mu shi ”1

4.1: Introduction

The Zhou kings did not sally forth from the West, conquer the Shang unaided, and bring the rest of the Huaxia world to heel. Traditional accounts hold, and archaeological materials confirm, that the early Zhou state was a conglomerate of interest groups with varying types and degrees of connection to the Zhou royal house. 2 With the overthrow of the Shang kings, the single greatest external point of contrast for the definition of the coalition as a group faded.

Maintaining the coherence of the Zhou cultural project in its absence was one of the greatest challenges faced by the Zhou kings in the construction of their state. The promulgation of

Shang-style ancestral ritual played an important role in that process. Other types of ceremonies, however, helped establish and maintain patronage relationships between high-status Zhou elites and their subordinates. These ceremonies, involving the conferral of both material wealth and

1 Shisanjing zhushu , 182-3. 2 Some were relatives, some were other Western peoples, some were former Shang adherents, and some were independent populations from the south and east. The “Mu shi,” cited above, is a standard source on the involvement of other fringe populations in the conquest; for the classic accounts of the assignments of states to royal relatives, see Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 111-73. Archaeological evidence on the constituent populations of the early Zhou state is both abundant and complex. For a summary of the archaeology of the Zhou and their allied populations both before and after the Shang conquest, see Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” in Cambridge History , 375-413. For an inscriptional source on the integration of diverse populations into the fabric of the early Zhou state, see the Ke lei 克罍 (JL 987), associated with the establishment of the state of Yan, near modern Beijing, by a relative of the Duke of Shao. On the discovery of this vessel, see Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo/Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo Liulihe kaogudui, “Beijing Liulihe 1193 hao da mu fajue jianbao,” Kaogu 1990.1, 20-31, esp. pp. 24-5. An English translation of this inscription appears in Bureaucracy , 241-2; 242, n. 2, offers a list of studies of the individual populations mentioned in the inscription.

233

prestige, enjoyed a substantial degree of overlap with the operation of the ancestral cult, spurring

the creation of a significant proportion of the Western Zhou period’s most extensively inscribed

bronzes.

This chapter examines the three main ritual instantiations of patronage portrayed in the

Western Zhou bronze inscriptions: the mieli , or “recounting of merits”; the ceremonial

performance of archery; and the appointment ceremony common in the middle and late Western

Zhou inscriptions. Considering the different approaches of these rites to the enrollment of

subordinates in the Zhou state project, it shows that the Zhou kings diversified their deployment

of resources in the ritual instantiation of patronage during the middle Western Zhou period. This

initiative bolstered a weakening model of military patronage dating back to the Shang, creating

new ritual contexts of recognition and reward of subordinates. These new contexts, the chapter

argues, both accompanied and helped create a deeper sense of distinction between the Zhou

kings and non-royal elites, a situation reflected in the portrayal of ancestral rituals in the bronzes

of the late Western Zhou period.

4.2: Mieli 蔑歷 (“recounting of merits”)

Most bronze inscriptions of any length, and especially those of the early Western Zhou, record the conveyance of recognition, material reward, or patronage to their commissioners in one way or another. The pithiest expression of those motives, however, and one which likely indicated a specific ceremony, was the term mieli 蔑歷. Mieli has been subject to a variety of

speculative readings since the beginnings of academically rigorous philological study of bronze

script. 3 Dissenting opinions on its precise nature continue to emerge. 4 Separate studies by Tang

3 Jiang Yunkai and Wang Yutang, “Mie li, ran gan shi,” Hunan shiyuan xuebao 1981.2, 93-4, contains an

234

Lan and Yan Yiping, however, established a reading of the phrase as “to recount merits” or “to

recognize achievements.” 5 In all likelihood, this process involved the reading and/or creation of

a written record of the merits being recounted. 6 Most treatments identify the term mie 蔑 in the

phrase with the character fa 伐, used in the phrase fayue 伐閱, of Han vintage, to describe a

similar procedure of detailing a government functionary’s life history. 7 Li Feng has recently put

forth the alternate reading of mie as mie 滅, meaning both “to extinguish” and “to fill”; the latter

reading, he suggests, further supports an understanding of mieli as including the composition (or

“filling out”) of a written account of the target’s accomplishments. 8

Whether it indeed involved a written record or not, there is no question that mieli was a

regularized ceremony conducted by Western Zhou authority figures that expressed satisfaction

toward a subordinate and was frequently accompanied by physical gifts. 9 The following discussion will consider those aspects of mieli in finer detail, with an eye toward changes in the patterns of its performance over the course of the Western Zhou period.

The body of inscriptions considered in the present study records 41 distinct occurrences of the mieli ceremony. The Xiaozi X you 小子卣 (5417), a late Shang vessel, holds one of

these; of the rest, 12 date to the early Western Zhou, 26 to the middle Western Zhou, and only 3

to the late Western Zhou. Between the early and middle Western Zhou periods in particular, the

informative summary of some of the earliest readings of the phrase. 4 See for example Luo Zhenyue, “’Mieli’ yici zai jinwen zhong de hanyi ji ci shi,” Guizhou daxue xuebao 19.5 (2001), 69-72, which puts forth the opinion that mieli indicated the conferral of foodstuffs; and Zhu Qizhi, “’Mieli’ xin shuo,” Zhongshan daxue xuebao 2010.6, 53-5, which reads the phrase as “to add rites” ( jia li 加禮). 5 Tang Lan, Tang Lan xiansheng jinwen lunji , Beijing: Zijincheng, 1995, 224-35; Yan Yiping, “Mieli guyi,” Zhongguo wenzi 10 (1962), 1-13. See also Shirakawa Shizuka, “Betsureki kai,” Koukotsugaku 4-5 (1959), 89-104. 6 Li Feng, “Literacy and the Social Contexts of Writing in the Western Zhou,” in Li Feng and David Prager Braner, eds., Writing and Literacy in Early China: Studies from the Columbia Early China Seminar , Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2011, 277-9. See also Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” 278-9. 7 Tang Lan, Tang Lan xiansheng , 226-34; Yan Yiping, “Mieli guyi,” 9-13; Cook, “Wealth and the Western Zhou,” 278-80; see also Li Feng, “Literacy and the Social Contexts,” 278. 8 Li Feng, ibid., 279. 9 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 226-9; “Literacy and the Social Contexts,” 278.

235

circumstances of mieli recorded in the inscriptions show significant differences. The following section will thus approach the known cases based on this chronological division.

4.2.1: Mieli in the early Western Zhou inscriptions

Inscriptions dated by AS to the early Western Zhou record a total of 12 instances of mieli associated with 10 distinct patronage relationships (table 4.1, Appendix 2). The Zhou kings performed half of these. The remaining cases were performed by an assortment of powerful lineage chiefs of the early Western Zhou period, including Bo Maofu 伯懋父, Bo Xinfu 伯屖父,

the Duke of Zhai ( Zhaigong 溓公), etc.; though one case, that recorded in the inscription of the

Xiaochen Lai gui 小臣簋 (4238-9), took place at the explicit request of the Zhou king.

Certain trends common among both royal and non-royal cases suggest a strong Shang association for the early performances of mieli . Of the five of these Western Zhou vessels on whose discovery information survives, only one, the Tian Wang gui 天亡簋 (4261), is said to have its origins in the Zhou homeland; the remaining four are associated with Henan and with the Luoyang area in particular. 10 Six of the inscriptions contain dedications to ancestors named with Shang-style tiangan names; only one names a dedicatee in other terms. 11 Together, these points suggest that the Zhou adopted the model of mieli from the Shang – an idea corroborated by the use of the term in the inscription of the Xiaozi X you 小子 卣 (5417), a late Shang

10 These are the Bao you and the Bao zun inscriptions, recording the king’s honoring of Bao; and the Jing gui , Xiaochen Lai gui , and Si ding , all recording cases of mieli performed by non-royal elites. The Xiaochen Lai gui (4238) is said to come from Lujiang county, Anhui (4238) and Xun county, Henan, to the southeast of Anyang (see the AS database); the rest are associated with Luoyang. On the Xiaochen Lai gui , see Zhensong 6.6-7, Zhenbu 1.28-9; for the (Yushi) Jing gui , see Zhensong 5.40 (both cited in Bureaucracy , Appendix 2); on the Si ding , see Zhenbu 1.11.1; on the Bao you and the Bao zun , see Duandai 2, 7-9, 568-9. 11 The former six are the Jing you and Jing gui , the Bao you and Bao zun , the Fan gui , the Yu gui , and the Naizi Ke ding . The Si ding may be another case; it is dedicated to a Father X, the final line of the inscription being too damaged to make out. The one exception mentioned is the inscription of the Geng Ying you , which is dedicated to "her cultured mother-in-law" ( jue wen gu 厥文姑).

236

vessel – and continued its use for the management of relationships with, and potentially between,

elites of Shang heritage. 12

With the exception of the Tian Wang gui – at any rate a questionable case – all of the

inscriptions record gifts of prestige goods from superior to subordinate. However, the particular

items given vary substantially, including metal, silk, hides, cowries, horses, garments, jewels,

vessels, and “treasures” generally construed. 13 This is in accord with the understanding of mieli as a framework for the recognition of success on military campaign; rewards granted would have depended on the spoils taken in the combat action just completed. 14

There is an important distinction to be made, however, between the early performances of mieli among non-royal elites and its implementation by the Zhou royal house. Those bronze inscriptions which record additional details about non-royal cases of mieli relate them only to military endeavors; thus Petty Minister Lai was recognized for his work on campaign against the

Eastern Yi, Jing for fighting against the Southern Yi, and Fan for his campaign support of the

Elder of Ji. The royal cases, by contrast, record wide variance in the context of the ceremony’s performance. Bao’s receipt of mieli came in conjunction with his assignment to the effort of subjugating Yin remnants in the east. The inscriptional record of mieli for Yu 寓 notes only that

he was assigned to assist a generic group of “great men” ( da ren 大人), however, and the Tian

Wang gui case is associated with the vessel commissioner’s assistance of the king in an ancestral

rite. The recipients of royal mieli ceremonies for which no context was recorded included Geng

Ying, who, judging from her designation with the xing -term Ying and the dedication of one of

12 This vessel’s use of mieli is noted in Bureacuracy , 228. 13 Bao you (5415), Bao zun (6003). 14 Li Feng notes the connection of early Western Zhou mieli with military campaigns; see Bureaucracy , 228.

237

her vessels to her mother-in-law ( gu 姑), was almost certainly female. 15 The situation with Yu

敔 is less certain; however, the king’s gift of finished, courtly robes suggests that the value of

Yu’s service may have lain in the administrative realm. 16 Evidently, the Zhou kings extended the interaction model of mieli beyond the context of military endeavor, putting it to work as a tool for managing relationships with civil officials and even powerful elite women. Given the lack of evidence for such use in non-royal inscriptions, it would appear that this retooling of mieli was an innovation of the Zhou royal house. 17

4.2.2: Mieli in the middle Western Zhou inscriptions

The majority of cases of mieli – 24, distributed between 26 inscriptions – appear in

inscriptions that JC/the AS database dates to the middle Western Zhou period (table 4.2,

Appendix 2). Many of the trends in its performance established during the early Western Zhou

carry over to this period. As with the early cases, these split almost precisely between instances

of mieli carried out by non-royal elites and those performed by the Western Zhou royal house.

Most cases of the former were still associated with military and police actions; in particular, the campaigns of a figure known as (Marshal/Elder) Father Yong ( Bo/Shi Yongfu 伯/師雍父)

15 This likely precluded her from substantial military service among the Zhou. For a possible counter-argument, see the description of the famed Shang figure Fu Hao in Robert L. Thorp, China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006, 136-7; see also Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, ed., Yinxu Fu Hao mu , Beijing: Wenwu, 1980. I am not aware of any such cases dating to the Western Zhou period, however. 16 This is in contrast with the gifts given in non-royal cases of early Western Zhou mieli , which were restricted to unfinished goods (hides, silk, metal) and portable wealth (cowries, horses, a zhang -jade). 17 The paucity of evidence makes it difficult to draw a contrast between the use of mieli under the Shang and its implementation by the Zhou kings. The OBI do not, to my knowledge, contain the phrase mieli , and the one case in the Shang bronze inscriptions, mentioned above, records that the recipient received the vague order to “first use men at Jin” ( 先以人于堇). It is thus difficult to say whether the use of mieli for non-military purposes was a break with Shang practice. Given that such cases do not appear among non-royal inscriptions, despite the fact that powerful non-royal elites must have had subordinates with civil responsibilities (on which see Bureaucracy , 248- 52), I am inclined to think that the use of mieli in non-military contexts was pioneered by the Zhou kings.

238

resulted in a number of mieli ceremonies and concomitantly produced bronzes. 18 There are notable exceptions, however, both associated with elite lineages designated as gong 公, “dukes.”

The inscription of the Fan you (5430), discussed in chapter 2, records that “the Duke” performed mieli for Fan after completing a series of his own ancestral rites, while the mieli in the inscriptions of the Ci you and Ci zun came in the wake of Ci’s appointment as an agricultural

overseer by a figure called Gong Ji. 19 Notably, both of these mieli were accompanied by gifts of finished goods – a fur coat ( qiu 裘) for Ci, a set of ancestral vessels ( zongyi 宗彝) for Fan – in

contrast with the militarily oriented cases, in which only cowries and metal were awarded. 20

Judging solely from the inscriptions, the contextually diverse royal approach to mieli was taken

up by certain powerful non-royal elites by the middle Western Zhou period, though the main

context of the practice among non-royal elites continued to be military in nature. 21

18 The inscriptions of the Yu yan 甗 (948), the X ding 鼎 (2721), the Lu gui 彔簋 (4122), the Lu you 彔卣 (5419-20), the Ju you 卣 (5411), and the You zun 尊 (6008) all record cases of mieli performed either by or on behalf of Bo/Shi Yongfu (table 4.2). These form part of a block of inscriptions mentioning Yongfu and generally dated together, on which see Shirakawa, vol. 2, chapter 17, 179-233. MWX dates these inscriptions to the reign of King Mu (see MWX , 113-23), as does Daxi (see 32a; 31b; 34b; 33b; 32b; and 33a, respectively). Shirakawa associates them with the southern campaigns of King Zhao (see vol. 2, 232), but also notes the similarity of their calligraphy to materials from the King Mu period, (vol. 2, 229). Duandai, on the other hand, dates most of this group to the latter half of King Kang’s reign; see Duandai, 2, no. 93). Together, these inscriptions contain half of the non-royal cases of mieli recorded in the bronze inscriptions. The datings of Daxi , MWX , and Shirakawa do not necessarily contradict each other. If King Zhao indeed perished during a campaign to the south, as would now seem relatively certain (see the discussion below), it is quite likely that some bronzes commemorating events associated with that campaign were in fact cast during the reign of the following king, King Mu. It is hardly surprising that most inscriptional records associated with that campaign would record interactions with non-royal power-holders, as those serving with the king at the time of his demise were presumably not honored for their efforts. 19 Following the naming conventions of the bronze inscriptions, Gong Ji was probably a woman of the Ji 姞 surname who was married to a figure bearing the title gong 公; see chapter 1. 20 This excludes the mieli mentioned in the inscriptions of the Si gui 簋 (4192-3) and the Shi Zai ding 師 鼎 (2830), which, though performed by non-royal elites, occurred ultimately at the behest of the king; these included the presentation of courtly garments and equestrian accoutrements. 21 In chapter 2, the same observation was made for the di/chi rite, which the Duke in question carried out in advance of his performance of mieli for Fan. Given that the rong  and di/chi 禘/啻 rites recorded in the Fan you were both performed by the Zhou king at major ritual events (see chapter 2) and that the Da gui 大簋 (4165) records a mieli at which the gift given was specifically meant to support the di/chi rite, it is likely that the Duke’s performance of a non-military mieli was a direct emulation of royal ritual practices.

239

As in the early Western Zhou, royal performances of mieli during the middle Western

Zhou occurred in a variety of contexts. Royal mieli lost its military character almost completely during this period, such that only one of the royal mieli rites was devoted to military personnel; that mieli , mentioned in the inscription of the Shi Wang ding (2812), targeted a Marshal Wang, described as “scion of the Grand Marshal” ( Taishi xiaozi 太師小子). 22 Other royal mieli

occurred in association with the appointment of a new Supervisor of Works (Mian you 免卣

[5418]/Mian zun 免尊 [6006]), a royal feasting and drinking session with which the honoree

assisted (Shi Ju fangyi 師遽方彝 [9897]), and other events of importance in the sphere of civil

governance. 23 These were accompanied by gifts of finished courtly clothing and jade

accoutrements, in contrast with the raw, portable wealth conferred on non-royal recipients of

military mieli .24

22 Ma dates the Shi Wang ding to King Gong (see MWX, 146), as does Daxi (see Daxi 63a). Li Feng suggests its dating to the reigns of Kings Yih-Xiao; see Bureaucracy , 227. This dating is based on its connections with a range of different bronzes, on which see Li Xueqin, Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu, Beijing: Wenwu, 1990, 85-7; for another consideration of the Shi Wang network of bronzes, see Shirakawa, vol. 3, 67-80. Another vessel, the Shi Zai ding 師鼎 (2830), records the performance of mieli for Marshal Zai by “the Elder Grand Marshal” ( Bo Taishi 伯太師) at the behest of the king; given that the Grand Marshal was his direct superior, Marshal Zai was almost certainly a military official. A reference to “my august deceased father King Mu" ( zhen huang kao Mu Wang 朕皇考穆王) in the Shi Zai ding inscription dates it unambiguously to the reign of King Gong; see Sources , 111. 23 One intriguing inscription, that of the Yi zhi 觶 (6516), commemorates a classic instance of the Western Zhou appointment ceremony (see below) and records the recipient’s expression of gratitude to the king for his mieli , suggesting a perceived commonality between the practices. Both MWX and Duandai date this inscription to the reign of King Yih 懿; see MWX, 178; Duandai , 184-5. Another of the above inscriptions, that shared by the Mian you and the Mian zun , records the performance of a mieli as part of an official appointment ceremony. A full translation and discussion of this inscription appears in Bureaucracy, p. 228; again, both MWX and Duandai date it to the reign of King Yih (see Duandai , 183; MWX, 178). To my knowledge, these are the only points of contact between these two phenomena in the Western Zhou record. Given the number and chronological distribution of independent occurrences of both mieli and the appointment ceremony, I am inclined to think that no regular connection existed outside these two occurrences. 24 Mian received a black leather kneepad with white hemp-colored band (following the reading in MWX , 179, n. 1); Yi, a gathered jacket ( shi yi 戠衣) and a black leather kneepad with white hemp-colored bands (again, ); Marshal Ju, a mian -jade tablet ( mian? gui [玉+面]圭) and four jade ring-ornaments ( huan zhang 環璋). Recipients of mieli associated with ceremonial archery meets received similar items (see table 4.2).

240

The royal program of ancestral ritual provided the context for three mieli carried out by

middle Western Zhou kings. The inscriptions of the Xian gui /pan 鮮盤 (10166) and the Da gui

大簋 (4165), both probably dating to around the time of King Mu, associate mieli with the rite called di/chi .25 The former commemorates Xian’s honoring with mieli after the king’s performance of di/chi for King Zhao, while the latter notes Da’s receipt of livestock intended for use in di/chi as a reward following mieli . The Duan gui 段簋 (4208) records the events of a

royal visit to Bi 畢 in which the king performed zheng -offerings, distributed gifts, and performed a mieli for the vessel commissioner Duan, apparently a scion of the local ruling family. 26 The

Zhou kings thus connected the existing patronage model of mieli with the ancestral ritual of the royal house, encouraging local elites to associate the receipt of material wealth and prestige with the successful propitiation of the royal ancestors. These events combining royal ancestral ritual, recognition, and reward must have presented attractive targets for emulation at the local level.

The Zhou king’s active promotion of the di/chi rite as seen in the Da gui inscription suggests that such emulation was a specific goal of the royal house.

The middle Western Zhou saw the conjunction of mieli with another emerging mode of ritual prestige distribution, that of the ceremonial archery competition. The inscriptions of the Yi hegai 義盉蓋 (9453) and the Chang Xin he 長盉 (9455) both record performances of mieli associated with major archery competitions ( she 射). 27 The former took place in the context of a grand convocation between the king, local rulers, and governmental officials at Lu 魯, in

25 Based on its description of an ancestral rite for King Zhao, the Xian gui may be accepted as a standard vessel for the reign of King Mu; on the common use of this dating standard, see Sources , 108. On the dating of the Da gui , see chapter 2, n. 22. 26 The inscription of the Duan gui makes clear that Duan claimed descent from a Bi Zhong 畢仲; this name would have indicated either a second son of the Bi lineage or a branch lineage descended from such a son. On the zheng - offerings mentioned, see chapter 2. 27 A fuller discussion of the Yi hegai appears later in this chapter. The Chang Xin he is a standard vessel for the reign of King Mu, thanks to the naming of that king in its inscription; on this see Sources , 110-1.

241

present-day Shandong. Yi’s role in this meeting is left unspecified; however, the discovery of

the Yi hegai in a tomb in the Zhangjiapo cemetery, near the Western Zhou heartland, suggests that he was part of the royal party. The Chang Xin he inscription will be considered more fully in the section on she . Here, it bears mentioning that the mieli in question was associated with

Chang Xin’s assignment to the Elder of Jing ( Jingbo 井伯), an influential figure in middle

Western Zhou politics, 28 and that the syntax of the inscription is ambiguous as to whether Chang

Xin received mieli from the king himself, from the Elder of Jing, or from both in succession. It is possible that the Chang Xin he inscription, like those of the Si gui and, probably, of the Shi Zai

ding , records a case in which the Zhou king delegated the responsibility of performing mieli to

an appropriate subordinate. 29

Early Western Zhou vessels that record instances of mieli , when they bear dedications, are mostly dedicated to ancestors bearing Shang-style tiangan names (see above). Many middle

Western Zhou cases – namely, the Tun ding 屯鼎 (2509-10), the Lu gui 彔簋 (4122), the Lu

Dong you 彔卣 (5419-20), the Ju you 卣 (5411), the Fan you 繁卣 (5430), and the You zun

尊 (6008) – share this quality. Several other such vessels, however, describe their dedicatees

with names of apparent “Zhou” style; the Shi Wang ding , for example, is dedicated to "my august deceased father Duke Gui" ( zhen huang kao Guigong 朕皇考宄公), while the Da gui was

created to honor Dazhong 大仲, deceased father of the vessel commissioner Da 大.30 Some of the vessels whose dedicatees bear tiangan names describe those ancestors with more typically

28 See chapter 2, note 226. 29 The Si gui 簋 (4192-3) is unambiguous on this point; it records Rong’s assignment to perform mieli , issue commands, and confer insignia. In the Shi Zai ding 師鼎 (2830) inscription, the king rewards Marshal Zai, who then receives mieli from his direct superior, the Elder Grand Marshal ( Bo Taishi 伯太師); the sequence suggests that the Elder Grand Marshal may have performed the recognition ceremony at the behest of the king. 30 Further examples include the Shi Zai ding , the You gui 簋 (4194), and the Shi Ju fangyi 師遽方彝 (9897). For a full list of dedicatees of all vessels considered in this work, see the Appendix.

242

“Zhou” vocabulary; the Lu you , for example, is dedicated to "[Lu’s] cultured father Duke Yi"

(wen kao Yigong 文考乙公), rather than to “Father Yi.” 31 Combined with the change in

geographic distribution – in contrast with the early Western Zhou cases, none of the middle

Western Zhou vessels with known provenance were discovered in Henan – this suggests a

spreading of the relevance of the mieli patronage model beyond the Shang cultural remnants. 32

Dating Western Zhou bronzes to specific reigns is a difficult undertaking under the best of circumstances. Fortunately, as noted in the above discussion, the middle Western Zhou vessels describing instances of mieli include two (the Chang Xin he and the Xian gui ) that can be

accepted as dating standards for the reign of King Mu, and numerous others that can be related to

each other based on the appearance of common figures in their inscriptions. Based on these

features, most bronzes bearing the term mieli can be dated relative to each other, in rough terms.

Table 4.3, Appendix 2, presents a number of scholars’ assessments of the dates of these bronzes.

The chronological trend is immediately obvious. Recorded cases of mieli performed by

non-royal Zhou elites are mainly concentrated in the early phase of the middle Western Zhou,

during the reigns of King Zhao and King Mu; these are largely, though not exclusively,

associated with the military activities of Marshal/Elder Father Yong. The main exceptions to

this are associated with royal efforts to promote ancestral rituals involving livestock offerings;

these include the inscription of the Xian gui , connected with the king’s performance of the di/chi

livestock offering, and that of the You gui , in which the king gives the honoree, You, three oxen

which You then offers to his deceased father. 33 By contrast, following the datings of Ma

31 Early Western Zhou vessels recording mieli and dedicated to male members of the preceding generation use the term fu 父, as does the Tun ding , a middle Western Zhou vessel; see the Appendix. The Ju you , like the Lu you , uses kao 考; the phrase used is "[his] cultured deceased father Ri Yi" ( wen kao Ri Yi 文考日乙). 32 Whether this was due to the fading significance of Shang cultural identity in general or to the shifting focus of royal ritual activities away from the Henan area, is unclear. 33 The Chang Xin he is another potential exception; as discussed above, however, its syntax leaves questions as to

243

Chengyuan, Shirakawa, Chen Mengjia, and Li Feng, the cases of mieli performed by Zhou kings

occurred mainly during the following two reigns, those of Kings Gong and Yih 懿.

4.2.3: Mieli in the late Western Zhou inscriptions

The practice of mieli fades from the inscriptional record after the middle Western Zhou

period. 34 The term mieli appears in only three inscriptions of late Western Zhou date (Appendix

2, table 4.4). One of these inscriptions, that shared by the two Cheng gui (3912-3), offers little

detail beyond the fact that a figure named Fusheng 鳧生 performed mieli for another figure called Cheng 爯, who then cast a vessel dedicated to yet another figure called by the combined

seniority title of Ji 季 and tiangan designation Ri Yi 日乙.35 The two that provide contextual

details both record mieli performed by the king. The Wu gui , likely dating to the reign of King

Li, commemorates the mieli received by Wu, a subordinate of the powerful late Western Zhou

personality Duke Wu, in the wake of the former’s successful defense of the central region of

Zhou power against encroachment by the southern population known as the Huaiyi. 36 The Liang

Qi zhong inscription is notable as the only case in which mieli was commemorated on a bell; the

recounting of merits it records took place after the king appointed Liang Qi as “Great Rectifier of

the Lords of States” ( bangjun dazheng 邦君大正), a position probably implying oversight of

whether the king himself performed mieli for Chang Xin. 34 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 228-9. 35 It should be noted that little information is extant on the two Cheng gui ; images are not publicly available. The dating of the two bronzes was, I suspect, done on the basis of the calligraphy; and in fact, the calligraphy of 3912 and 3913 is quite different in style. See Jungu 2.2.68.2; Zhoujin 3.108.3. The assignment of the two bronzes to the late Western Zhou must be considered tentative. 36 The Wu gui appears in Bogu 16.36. The drawing in that source is fortunately quite detailed, such that the Wu gui can readily be identified as a late Western Zhou bronze by comparison with such excavated vessels as the Guo Ji gui 虢季簋 (NA0016-21), the Tai Shi gui 太師簋 (3633) or the Wang Zuo Jiang Shi gui 王作姜氏簋 (3570). MWX dates the vessel to King Li, as does Li Feng; see MWX, 286; Bureaucracy , 140. Shirakawa is essentially in agreement, based on the mention of the Elder of Rong in the inscription; see Shirakawa 164, 469-77, esp. 477.

244

local power-holders on behalf of the royal house. 37 Both late Western Zhou recipients of royal

mieli , then, took part in events of national-level import. This may explain why their recognition warranted the performance of what had become an unusual practice, mieli by then having largely been supplanted by the official appointment ceremony. 38

4.2.4: Summary and further discussion

While the ceremony known as mieli had its origins in Shang practice, our knowledge of it

comes mainly from the many Western Zhou bronze inscriptions for whose creation it served as a

primary motivator. These show that mieli denoted a form of military patronage among early

Western Zhou lineage chiefs; that it was accompanied by gifts of portable wealth probably

obtained as campaign booty; and that the early Western Zhou kings used mieli as a tool for

managing subordinates in a variety of contexts both military and civil. Given the equal

proportion of early Western Zhou mieli performed by kings to those performed by non-royal

elites, and given that the contexts of its performance by non-royal elites are less variable than

those of royal instances, it is doubtful that the Zhou kings were its point of origin among the

Western Zhou elite population; it is more likely that the practice was known already among

former Shang adherents and that the royal house retooled it to serve non-military purposes.

Through both their distribution (concentrated largely in Henan) and their dedications

(weighted toward ancestors with tiangan names), early Western Zhou bronzes and their

inscriptions suggest a strong association of mieli with Shang cultural remnants. By the middle

Western Zhou – numerically speaking, the heyday of portrayal of mieli in bronze inscriptions –

37 MWX dates the Liang Qi zhong bell set to the King Yi-King Li period; see MWX, 273. Zhang and Liu see zheng /dazheng as a generic term for “chief” or “leader”; see Xi Zhou jinwen guanzhi yanjiu , 58. 38 Li Feng, Bureaucracy, 228-9. In fact, the process recorded in the inscription of the Wu gui included elements common in the appointment ceremony, specifically the appearance of a higher-ranking youzhe , “assistant” or “attendant on the right.”

245

both of these associations were on the wane. After the reigns of Kings Cheng and Kang, the

political and military focus of the Zhou royal house shifted from the former Shang heartland in

Henan to the periphery of Zhou territory and especially to the south, where King Zhao conducted

a series of campaigns. 39 This change in the main theater of Zhou expansion may have predicated a decrease in the proportion of mieli recipients using tiangan funerary names, as elites of other regional backgrounds became involved in activities of import to the Zhou state. 40 As the Zhou conquest of Shang receded further into the past, it is also feasible that the relative importance of claims of Shang heritage faded in the lives of elite families with developing traditions of participation in Zhou state activities. 41 Assessment of the relative importance of these factors

must await further inquiry.

During the early years of the middle Western Zhou period, mieli performed by the royal

house were completely divorced from military affairs; the only royal mieli of likely King Mu

date either accompanied royal ceremonial events – particularly, the di/chi rite (as in the Xian gui )

and archery (as recorded in the Chang Xin gui ) – or justified royal patronage of the ancestral

rites of non-royal elites through gifts of livestock offerings (as in the You gui and the Da gui ). 42

Non-royal cases, however, remained a tool for powerful Western Zhou military leaders to

recognize, reward, and manage personnel; in particular, the figure known as Marshal/Elder

Father Yong conducted a number of mieli for his subordinates as part of his activities at Hu 胡 and at the “Old Encampment” ( gu shi 古師). Recent work on the bronze inscriptions has

39 See Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 322-3; Li Feng, Landscape and Power, 93-5, 327-9; Yang Kuan, Xi Zhou shi , 555-8. On the manifestations of King Zhao’s campaigns in the inscriptions, see Lu Liancheng, “An di yu Zhao Wang shijiu nian nanzheng,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1984.6, 75-79; Li Yubiao, “Xin chu tongqi mingwen suo jian Zhao Wang nanzheng,” in Zhu Fenghan, ed., Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi , Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2011, 275-85. 40 Elsewhere, I suggest that similar factors led to the waning of certain vocabulary items relating to ancestral ritual; see the sections on su and yue in Chapter 3. 41 This connects to the overall question of the degree to which Shang-remnant elites retained a sense of their Shang identity throughout the Western Zhou and into the Eastern Zhou period. This area is ripe for further inquiry. 42 Based on this commonality, I suspect that the Da gui dates specifically to the reign of King Mu.

246

confirmed the assertions of early Chinese sources that the Zhou royal house suffered severe

military setbacks in the southern reaches of Zhou territory during the reign of King Zhao, who

was killed in an unsuccessful campaign in the south. 43 It is likely that the military infrastructure of the Zhou royal house and, concomitantly, the network of relations between the Zhou kings and elites that followed them in times of war were compromised by these setbacks. The lack of royal military mieli during the reign of King Mu, combined with the use of the ceremony in

conjunction with royal ceremonies and patronage of ancestral ritual, may thus indicate an effort

to shore up patronage relations between the king and other powerful Zhou elites through

expansion of non-military activities at a time of unprecedented military vulnerability for the

Zhou royal house. I will argue later that changes made in the strategic use of ritual by the Zhou

kings at this time laid the groundwork for a break between the ritual practices of local elites and

the central government of the Zhou state.

After the reign of King Mu, the royal house became more active in its implementation of

mieli ; most relevant inscriptions from the remainder of the Western Zhou period record royal

performances of the ceremony. 44 As we will later see, the middle Western Zhou saw the rise of the official appointment ceremony as well; the above discussion has noted the brief points of overlap between mieli and the appointment ceremony (as identified by the physical orientation of the appointer and appointee and/or the presence of the youzhe ). 45 The appointment ceremony,

43 See note 39. 44 The degree of connection between these royal mieli and the military organization of the state is a potential topic for further inquiry. None of the remaining middle Western Zhou mieli bronzes mention specific campaign actions; however, mieli such as those recorded in the Shi Zai ding and the Shi Wang ding inscriptions would seem, based on their references to the Grand Marshal ( taishi 太師), to have related to the military infrastructure of the Western Zhou state. This may represent a recovery of control over military infrastructure on the part of the Western Zhou kings; certainly, without some degree of recovery, the Zhou kings would likely have lost control over the state (as indeed happened later during the Gonghe interregnum). Li Feng sees just such a recovery of control in the bronzes of King Mu’s era, particularly those of the figure called Li  ; see Landscape and Power , 95. 45 The Da Yu ding , for example, records a courtly ceremony of appointment in some detail; it does not, however, share the common traits of appearance of the youzhe , positioning of the appointee in the center of the audience

247

however, remained common throughout the Western Zhou period, while the practice of mieli

waned after the middle Western Zhou. 46 This begs the question: why did the practice of mieli fall by the wayside, while that of the appointment ceremony thrived?

Mieli was performed by both the Zhou kings and non-royal elites throughout the period of its use, though it was sometimes more common among one group than the other. In the previous chapter, we have seen that the approach of the early Western Zhou royal house to ancestral ritual events strove to establish the Zhou kings as an “obligatory passage point” for the arrogation of prestige and status by non-royal elites. Prestige rites arguing for the king’s status as mediator of the forces of the natural world, as well as royal patronage of ancestral offerings of livestock, continued this project into the middle Western Zhou period. As a ceremony known across the Zhou elite cultural sphere, mieli presented a valuable tool for the royal house to

reiterate and reinforce relations of patronage with non-royal elites; but the commonality of mieli

also conflicted with the royal project of exclusive control over the distribution of prestige and

arbitration of status. As the royal appointment ceremony became known and institutionalized as

a vehicle of recognition and reward, it is likely that the royal house moved to emphasize the

former, in which the king occupied a spatially and ideologically central position, over the latter,

which could be performed in the field and admitted the substitution of other elite patrons.

Especially during the early Western Zhou, mieli was strongly associated with personal

achievement and endeavor. 47 Even into the middle and late Western Zhou periods, a sizeable

proportion of mieli inscriptions record the specific deeds for which their commissioners were

hall, etc., that characterize the great mass of official appointment inscriptions dating from the reign of King Mu onward. On this distinction, see section 4.4.1, “Physical orientation of participants in the appointment ceremony.” 46 For an example set of relatively detailed appointment inscriptions, including several from both the middle and late Western Zhou periods, see Li Feng, Bureaucracy, 201-15. 47 The inscriptions of the Bao you and zun , the Tian Wang gui , and the Fan gui all contain relatively direct references to the deeds of their commissioners; see table 4.1.

248

recognized. 48 The standardized appointment ceremony thus offered another advantage over mieli : it lacked this preexisting association and so was more readily implemented for both hereditary appointments and appointments of individuals with no prior history of official service. 49 Li Feng has shown that the system of hereditary appointment practiced during the Western Zhou was in fact quite flexible and afforded the Zhou kings room for engagement in the process. 50 The appointment ceremony provided a structured vehicle for that engagement, allowing the Zhou kings to bring new individuals into the system and to shift existing participants between positions without specific regard for prior accomplishments. 51 It may thus have provided a more attractive

ritual model of patronage for the Zhou royal house in an environment of expansion of elite

lineages without corresponding expansion of the geographic resources of the Zhou royal house. 52

The increased density of elite lineage members in such an environment would have created a surplus of potential candidates competing for official positions. 53 The focus of royal ceremonial

activities on the selection of candidates for office, rather than on the recognition and retention of

existing candidates, was likely a result of this phenomenon.

4.3: She 射 (archery)

Archery is among the best-recorded ceremonial practices of the late Zhou dynasty, enjoying dedicated chapters in each of the Sanli texts. 54 The idea of ritual archery has received

48 The inscriptions of the Shi Wang ding , the Duan gui , the Yin ji li , the Shi Zai ding , the Yu yan , the Dian ding , the Ci you and zun , and the Fan you are all relatively straightforward about the deeds of their commissioners; see Appendix 1, table 4.2. 49 There are, however, certain middle Western Zhou mieli inscriptions – for example, those of the Shi Wang ding and the Duan gui – that make direct reference to the illustrious ancestors of the recipients of mieli . 50 Li Feng , Bureaucracy , 192-9. 51 Ibid., 201-17. 52 Ibid., 36-8, 95. 53 Ibid., 36, 62-3, 215-7. 54 See “She yi,” in Liji zhengyi, Shisanjing zhushu , 1686-9; “Xiang she” and “Da she,” in Yili zhengyi , Shisanjing zhushu , 993-1014 and 1027-46, respectively; “She ren,” in Zhouli zhengyi , Shisanjing zhushu 845-6;

249

correspondingly heavy attention among modern scholars of early China. Dedicated studies of

the practice of shooting ( she 射) in pre-Qin China tend to approach the Western Zhou manifestations of the term as a preface to its more detailed records in Eastern Zhou received texts. 55 However, Liu Yu has put forth an extensive and comparatively nuanced compilation of

the records of ceremonial archery in the Western Zhou inscriptions. 56 Rather than duplicating

Liu’s efforts, the following section will focus on the relationships between the different varieties and goals of ritual archery previously observed in the Western Zhou inscriptions, supplementing its arguments with inscriptional sources unavailable at the time of Liu’s writing. 57

4.3.1: Royal archery as military metaphor

Both the Zhou and their predecessors the Shang used the bow as a principal weapon of elite warfare. The appearance of archery equipment in elite tombs dating to the late Shang and throughout the Western Zhou period attests to this fact. 58 Skill at archery was considered indicative of military ability in general, such that the powerful individuals responsible for the protection of the reaches of the Shang and, later, the Zhou states were known as hou 侯, the

character for which depicts a target for practice shooting. 59 The bow was thus part of the

“materialized ideology” of authority among the elites of Bronze Age China. Its use was a valuable tool for making arguments about the place of the king in elite society and in the world

55 Dedicated studies on the topic are too numerous to list exhaustively, but include Yang Kuan, “’She li’ xin tan,” in Xi Zhou shi , 716-41; Jiang Nan, “’She li’ yuanliu kao,” Beijing ligong daxue xuebao 2004.6, 94-6; Zhao Honghong, “Shilun Xian Qin sheli de chansheng he xingcheng,” Jiangnan daxue xuebao 2010.2, 57-63; Hu Xinsheng, “Xi Zhou shiqi san lei butong xingzhi de sheli jiqi yanbian,” Wen shi zhe 2003.1, 112-7. 56 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” Kaogu 1986,12, 1112-20. 57 Specifically, the Zhabo gui , discussed below, was discovered only recently. 58 See Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo, ed., Yinxu de faxian yu yanjiu, Beijing: Kexue, 1994, 314-5; Zhangjiapo , 179-80. 59 On that character see JGWZGL, 2542-5; JWGL, 3457-69; Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 44, n. 4.

250

in general. 60 The Shang kings conducted demonstrations of skill that took advantage of the usefulness of the bow in that respect. The kings of the early Western Zhou, successors to the ritual vocabulary of the Shang, elaborated upon these demonstrations, adding additional elements that magnified the mimetic efficacy of royal shooting.

The oracle bone inscriptions of the late Shang provide evidence that the elites of the period conducted regular archery practice, particularly on various bodies of water. 61 The extraordinary Zuoce Ban yuan 作冊般鼋, acquired by the Chinese National Museum in 2003, offers a detailed glimpse at one of these events. 62 The inscription of the Zuoce Ban yuan describes the successful shooting of a turtle by the Shang king and his attendants, among whom the vessel commissioner, Document Maker Ban, likely numbered; this was followed by the king’s granting of a reward to the Document Maker for a still-debated purpose. 63 The vessel, or rather item, itself offers a further level of detail; it is cast in the shape of the turtle in question, with bronze arrowhead attachments marking the location and trajectory of the lethal shots. 64

60 For the classic statement on materialized ideology, see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, 15-31. The passive term “materialized” or “materialization” risks underestimating the agency of objects in the formation of groups, on which see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 63-86. To claim that an object – or, to avoid confusion, a “non- human,” as Latour puts it (see p. 72) – plays an active role in the instantiation of a group does not, however, mean that it cannot be a (grammatical) object, i.e., that it must act itself but cannot be acted upon. The core of the two approaches to the role of objects in the formation and maintenance of groups is similar, in that both highlight the importance of objects in extending and maintaining interaction models through otherwise insurmountable distances in time and space (see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, 16-7; Latour, 67-8. 61 Song Tianhao, “Cong xin chu jiagu jinwen kaoshu wan Shang sheli,” in Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.1, 10-18. 62 Li Xueqin, “Zuoce Ban tong yuan kaoshi,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 4-5. Additional analyses include Zhu Fenghan, “Zuoce Ban yuan tanxi,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 6-10; Wang Guanying, “Zuoce Ban tong yuan san kao,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 11-3; Qiu Xigui, “Shang tong yuan ming bushi,” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.6, 4-5; Song Tianhao, “Cong xin chu jiagu jinwen kaoshu wan Shang sheli”; and Li Kai, “Shilun Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” Zhongyuan wenwu 2007.3, 46-50. 63 Li Xueqin suggests that the king was commanding Zuoce Ban to commemorate the event in song; see “Zuoce Ban tong yuan kaoshi,” 4-5. Wang Guanying is in accord with this view; see “Zuoce Ban tong yuan san kao,” 12. Zhu Fenghan suggests that the commemoration was to be done with a vessel, i.e., the Zuoce Ban yuan itself; see “Zuoce Ban yuan tanxi,” 7-8. Qiu Xigui parses the relevant clause differently, suggesting that it indicated that Zuoce Ban was to send the slain turtle to a worksite for some manner of processing; see “Shang tong yuan ming bushi,” 5. Li Kai presents the various views as to the grammar of the clause, as well as his own interpretation that it refers to two different types of ceremony, in “Shilun Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” 47-8. 64 Li Xueqin, “Zuoce Ban tong yuan kaoshi,” 4; Li Kai, “Shilin Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” 47. The latter contains an informative discussion on the likely position of the shooters. Zhu Fenghan, “Zuoce Ban yuan tanxi,”

251

Whatever one’s reading of the reward line of the inscription, it is certainly the case that the

Shang attached great cosmological importance to turtles, such that the successful shooting of one

must have made a strong symbolic statement about the power of the Shang royal house. 65 The

inclusion of Document Maker Ban and his fellows in that process 66 allowed them to share in its symbolic potence as collaborators with the Shang king. The issuing of a performance-based reward afterward would have encouraged them in the pursuit of archery as a vehicle for the pursuit of both material wealth and prestige within the context of the Shang royal project.

Inscriptions from the early Western Zhou record similar demonstrations of prowess performed by the early Zhou kings. These derive from the complex of feasting, ancestral offerings, and provision of hospitality known in some inscriptions as the da feng/li 大豐/禮, “the great rite” or “the great abundance,” in which the king proceeded in a boat around the terrain feature known as the biyong pond, firing at targets along the way. 67 These targets varied from

occasion to occasion; the Mai fangzun records that the king shot birds, while the Bo Tangfu ding ,

a late early-early middle Western Zhou bronze, records the king’s shooting of an enormous

variety of land animals, including both herbivores and carnivores. 68 Turtles did not, however,

provides the best images of the bronze itself. 65 See Allan, The Shape of the Turtle , 103-11. Li Kai makes note of the importance of turtles among the Shang; see “Shilin Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” 48. 66 In all likelihood, Document Maker Ban was one of three attendants to the king on the hunting trip; see Li Kai, “Shilin Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” 47. 67 On the question of precisely which Western Zhou kings performed archery demonstrations, and for a full treatment of the da feng/li rite, see the previous chapter, section 4.2.1.2. 68 On the discovery of the Bo Tangfu ding, see the previous chapter, section 4.2.3.1. In his treatment of the Zuoce Ban gui , Li Kai argues that the turtle shot by the king and his men must have been captured separately and intentionally placed as a fixed target. In doing so, he makes a similar argument for the range of animals, including deer, leopards, tigers, etc., shot by the king in the events of the Bo Tangfu ding . See “Shilin Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli,” 48-9. I am less sure than Li that four separate Shang archers might not have successfully hit a free-roaming turtle, especially given that the Zuoce Ban gui is in many ways exceptional and thus might have recorded an unusual occurrence. Li is undoubtedly correct about the Bo Tangfu ding , however; that a menagerie of creatures including tigers, leopards, and white deer and wolves would have wandered near the shore of the biyong pond just as the king’s boat passed beggars belief.

252

number among them. 69 If the early Zhou kings weakened the cosmological implications of archery demonstrations by not shooting turtles, however, they strengthened them by conducting their shoots on the controlled terrain of the biyong pond. 70 Operating as a microcosm of the

Zhou sphere of influence, the biyong pond (or, as it is called in the inscription of the Bo Tangfu ding , the bichi , or “sovereign pond”) was a slate on which the king, through his own motions, inscribed arguments about the power of the Zhou royal house relative to both allies (who, as in the Mai fangzun and Bo Tangfu ding cases, might follow the king as observers) and enemies (as represented by the targets of hunting). 71 The movement of the king to the directional extremes of

the pond, and his subsequent shooting of animals, was a mimetic extension of royal military

might across the reaches of the Zhou sphere of influence.

We know from these inscriptions that the early Zhou kings shot animals as an element of

political theater; a received source of likely early Western Zhou date records a case when

humans served as the targets. The latter portion of the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu narrates

a ritual event of grand scale, marking the triumphant return of the Zhou royal party to the

Feng/Hao area. 72 With them, the passage tells us, the royal partisans brought a large group of former Shang functionaries, referred to as “evil ministers.” Arraying these captives outside the gates of the city, the Zhou king ordered a scribe to read an announcement of condemnation; the assembled Shang ministers were then shot as a preface to the King’s entry into the city.

69 It should be noted that the Zhou did record “fishing” ( yu 漁) expeditions in bronze inscriptions and that Liu Yu considers these to be ceremonial demonstrations of archery as well; see Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” Kaogu 1986.12, 1112-20, esp. 1112-3. Liu’s argument seems to rely on the later constructions of “ritual archery” vs. “practice archery” presented in the ritual books; see pp. 1112-3; Liji, “She yi,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1689. I see no specific evidence in the inscriptions themselves to suggest that these fishing events involved the shooting of a bow. If they did, however, it is entirely possible that the targets sought included turtles. 70 The cosmological associations of the biyong pond are argued for in detail in the section on da feng/li in the previous chapter. 71 It is intriguing to speculate as to whether the targets chosen for royal archery demonstrations were chosen for their symbolic relationships to problematic populations. For a detailed account of this question, see chapter 3, section 4.2.1.5. 72 See Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu jiaopu zhuyi , 210-21.

253

By dispatching the ministers outside the city walls, on the fringes of the center of Zhou

power, the king crafted an ideological statement about the relationship between the old Shang

and new Zhou orders. He promoted the executed Shang ministers as a physical, political, and

moral out-group against which the formative Zhou identity – including as it did many elements

of Shang practice and, in fact, large populations of Shang-heritage elites – was to take shape. 73

At the same time, by killing the ministers on the edges of the active space of the ritual – in this case, the city of Feng/Hao 74 – the king reiterated the geopolitical model promoted mimetically by

the biyong pond shooting rites, depicting and representing (in the literal sense) the capacity of the

Zhou coalition to kill effectively on the distant edges of its territory. 75

It is of note that, while certain important captives were beheaded at this event, the mass group of “evil ministers” was simply shot. In this sense also, their role echoed, or was echoed by, that of the animal victims in the later biyong pond rites. Rather than standing as full human beings in their own right, they both represented populations of non-Zhou allegiance and served as a vehicle for the king to promote the perception of his military potence.

4.3.2: Archery as education vs. archery as diplomacy

73 On the definition of group boundaries and anti-groups as a diagnostic criterion of the process of group formation, see Latour, Reassembling the Social, 32-3. 74 The full ritual sequence described in the section involves a procession from the city limits, through the city, to the ancestral temple of the king. The structure of the city itself was thus the base scale of the ritual event in question, with the city walls forming its boundaries. For more on this point, see the discussion of the “Shi fu” in chapter 5 of this work. 75 As the Zhou coalition was composed of “men of the west,” the city of Shang itself was the distant eastern edge of Zhou territory immediately post-conquest; and indeed, the project of pushing still further eastward would require much of the subsequent reign of King Cheng. See Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 310-1.. As the ritual event described in the “Shi fu” preceded those recorded in the Mai fangzun and the Bo Tangfu ding inscriptions, it is perhaps more correct to say that it “iterated” the model, and that later performances on the biyong pond reiterated it.

254

The inscription of the very recently discovered Zhabo gui 柞伯簋 (NA0076) offers a detailed image of a royally sponsored archery competition: 76

隹（唯）八月辰才（在）庚申，王大射才（在）周，王令（命）南宮率王多士， 77 師父率小臣，王（遲）赤金十反（鈑），王曰：「小子、小臣敬又（有） 78 （賢）隻（獲）則取。」柞白（伯）十（稱）弓，無  （廢）矢。王則畀柞白（伯）赤金十反（鈑），（遂）易（賜）（柷）虎，柞白（伯）用乍（作）周公寶尊彝。 It was the eighth month, on the morning of the gengshen day. The king greatly performed archery at Zhou. The king ordered Nangong to lead the many royal retainers and Shi Xfu to lead the petty ministers. The king held back ten plates of red metal. 79 The king said, “Those among the scions and petty ministers who are reverent and have worthy accomplishments may take [them].” Zhabo was called on to shoot ten times and did not lose (i.e., miss with) a single arrow. The king thus gave Zhabo the ten plates of red metal, then further awarding him an instrument-tiger (some kind of jade item?). Zhabo therewith makes a precious, revered vessel for the Duke of Zhou.

The sequence of events itself requires little explanation; our interest lies in the specific parties involved in the event. Identifying the “many retainers” of the beginning of the inscription with the “scions” ( xiaozi 小子) mentioned in the king’s speech, Wang Longzheng and others cast the event as a contest with an educational aspect, held between aristocratic sons (the “scions” of the above translation) on the one hand, and royal servants with a military bent (the “petty ministers”) on the other. 80 A figure called Zhabo (“the Elder of Zha”) distinguished himself in

76 On the discovery of the Zhabo gui , see Wang Longzheng et al., “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” Wenwu 1998.09, 53-8. Wang et al. suggest a King Kang date for the Zhabo gui based on similarities in form and calligraphy with a variety of other vessels, including in particular the Da Yu ding . The AS database dates the vessel to the reign of King Zhao. 77 I have replaced the transcription offered in the AS database with this symbol. 78 Ibid. 79 Reading chi 遲 as “to hold back.” The sense is that the king reserved these metal plates for the winner of the contest. 80 Wang Longzheng et al, “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” 55-7. The inscriptions of the Ling ding and the Jing gui lend this interpretation some support, although, as we will see below, the relationship between ceremonial archery and the education of noble youths is less than exclusive. The identity of the individual referred to in the inscription as Nangong (“Southern Palace”) is a matter of some debate. Wang Longheng and the other authors suggest that Nangong was an official with specific responsibility for the training of aristocratic scions, while citing the alternate viewpoints that the term referred to the Zhou royal heir, to one of the royal sons, or to Nangong Kuo; see Wang Longzheng et al, “Xin faxian de

255

this contest and thereby received not just the reward stipulated by the king, but also an additional

valuable item. Wang and the other authors plausibly identify Zhabo as a descendant of the Duke

of Zhou and chief of the ruling line of the Zha state; he would thus fall into the “scions” category

stipulated in the inscription. 81 One wonders whether the xiaochen involved in the competition had the capacity to distinguish themselves in this manner, or whether they were meant to serve as a backdrop for the skill of the young Zhou aristocrats.

Prior scholarship has made much of the use of communal archery among the Zhou as a tool for the martial education of elites.82 The designation in the inscriptions of a certain elite

servant as an archery teacher at the Palace of Study (Xue Gong 學宮), along with the appearance of the location name “the Archery Hut ( Shelu 射盧),” leaves little doubt that a royally sponsored

program of institutional instruction in archery existed by the early phase of the middle Western

Zhou at the latest, and probably before. 83 Several of the most informative inscriptional records of ceremonial archery, however, focus on the participation of powerful and presumably adult office-holders, up to and including the king himself. The inscription of the Yi hegai 義盉蓋

Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” 54-5; Li Xueqin, “Zhong fangding yu ‘Zhouyi’,” Weuwu yanjiu 1989.6, 197-201; Wang Guowei, “Mingtang miao qin tongkao,” Congshu jicheng xubian , vol. 10, Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1994; Xu Zongyuan, “Jinwen zhong suo jian guanming kao,” Fujian shifan xueyuan xuebao 1957.2, 176-210. 81 Wang Longzheng et al., “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” p. 54. The argument is based on both references to the Zuozhuan and the dedication of the vessel to the Duke of Zhou. 82 See for example Wang Longzheng et al., “Zhabo gui yu da sheli ji Xi Zhou jiaoyu zhidu,” Wenwu 1998.09, 59-61, esp. 60; Yang Kuan, “’Sheli’ xin tan,” pp. 734-8. 83 See the discussion of the Jing gui 靜簋 (4273) and the Ban gui 班簋 (4341) in Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1114. Wang Longzheng et al. plausibly date the Zhabo gui to the reign of King Kang based on both stylistic criteria and the appearance of the figure Nangong, although I think a King Zhao date is possible as well; see “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” 53-4. Based on its connection with the Ban gui, the Jing gui is probably dateable to the reign of King Mu; see Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1114; Shaughnessy, Sources , 250-2. (The inscription of the Jing gui is translated below.) These two inscriptions thus give us a terminus post quem of King Kang for the staging of royally sponsored archery meets, and King Mu for the existence of a dedicated institutional infrastructure for the teaching of archery. The “Archery Hut” ( Shelu 射盧) appears in the inscriptions of the Fifteenth-year Quecao ding 十五年曹鼎, a dating standard for the reign of King Gong, and the Kuang you 匡卣 (5423), a dating standard for King Yih (see Sources, 111).

256

(9453), discovered in tomb 304 of the Zhangjiapo cemetery at Fengxi, Shaanxi, offers the most

detailed example: 84

隹（唯）十又一月既生霸甲申，王才（在）魯，即邦君、者（諸）侯、正、有 （司）大射，義蔑曆，眔于王逨義易（賜）貝十朋，對揚王休，用乍（作）寶盉，子子孫孫其永寶。 It was the eleventh month, during the jishengba moon phase, on the jiashen day. The king was at Lu. He came together with the lords of the states, the many lords, the regulators, and the Supervisors and greatly conducted archery. 85 Yi received the recounting of merits, and the king also arranged for Yi to be given ten strings of cowries. 86 He responds by praising the king’s beneficence, therewith making a precious, revered he -vessel; may his sons’ sons and grandsons’ grandsons eternally treasure [it].

Here no hint appears of the participation of “scions”; instead, the inscription portrays a meeting,

apparently held in the eastern redoubt of Zhou territory, at which the king brought regional state

rulers of various degrees of importance together with official appointees with a wide range of

responsibilities over the operation of the Zhou state. This event provided the context for Yi’s

receipt of the mieli recognition ceremony; the fact that the Yi hegai was discovered in the

Zhangjiapo cemetery suggests strongly that Yi belonged to the royal party and accompanied the king back to the Zhou heartland. The inscription makes no effort to connect the king’s recognition of Yi with the details of the archery performance; it would seem that Yi was honored

84 On the discovery of the Yi hegai , see Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Fengxi fajuedui, “1984 nian Fengxi Dayuancun Xi Zhou mudi fajue jianbao,” Kaogu 1986.11, 977-83. The excavators suggest a late Zhou dynasty date for the tomb based on ceramic vessels (p. 981); however, the content and calligraphy of the Yi hegai inscription both demand a Western Zhou date, and the AS database plausibly assigns the vessel to the middle Western Zhou. 85 The offices of the Three Supervisors ( yousi ) existed at various levels of the Zhou hierarchy and between them had responsibility for oversight over military, civil, and legal affairs; see Zhang and Liu, Xi Zhou jinwen guanzhi yanjiu , 8-26; Bureaucracy , 305-8. The term zheng unquestionably refers to a group of people here, appearing as it does in series with bangjun , zhuhou , and sanyousi . For an interpretation of the term zheng as a generic term meaning “chief” or “leader,” see Zhang Yachu and Liu Yu, Xi Zhou jinwen guanzhi yanjiu , 58. Li Feng has raised important methodological concerns about the recognition of official titles in Bureaucracy , 42-3; he does not include zheng in his list of official titles of the Western Zhou period. 86 The AS database transcription places a comma between wang 王 and lai 逨; here I follow the suggestion of Li Feng (personal communication, March 21, 2012) that wang is to be seen as the subject of the verb lai .

257

for his overall service to the king, or perhaps his assistance with the staging of the ceremony,

rather than for his performance in the archery competition. 87

In the events of the Yi hegai inscription, the archery shoot acted as a context for political

interaction among the upper echelons of established Zhou power-holders, rather than as

infrastructural support for the indoctrination and recognition of up-and-coming Zhou youths. 88

The Chang Xin he inscription offers a similar example, also including a mieli ceremony.

Discovered in a tomb in Chang’an county, Shaanxi, in the 1950s, the Chang Xin he calls King

Mu by name in its inscription, making it one of the standard dating bronzes for that king’s reign. 89 It commemorates the recognition and reward of Chang Xin at an event including an

archery meet. While not without difficult points, the narrative of events is short and simple

enough to allow the inscription to speak for itself:

隹（唯）三月初吉丁亥，穆王才（在）下淢，穆王鄉（饗）豊（醴），即井白（伯）、大祝射，穆穆王蔑長甶 （以）逨即井白（伯），井白（伯）氏彌不姦，長甶蔑，敢對揚天子不（丕）休，用肈（肇）乍（作）彝。 During the third month, in the chuji moon phase, on the dinghai day, King Mu was at the City of the Lower Moat. 90 King Mu feasted with drinking and brought the Elder of Jing and the Grand Invoker to perform archery. King Mu recounted Chang Xin’s [merits] by assigning him to go to the Elder of Jing. 91 The Elder of Jing was greatly reverent and not

87 Liu Yu suggests that Yi may have been responsible for gathering the participants in the ritual at Lu; see “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115. 88 Liu Yu recognizes the common use of ritual archery as a context for royal supervision and control of powerful elites; see ibid., 1116. 89 See Sources , 110. On the discovery of the Chang Xin he and the Chang Xin gui , see Shaanxi sheng wenwu guanli weiyuanhui, “Chang’an Puducun Xi Zhou mu de fajue,” Kaogu xuebao 1957.1, 75-85, 220-5; for an early reading of the inscription, see Guo Moruo, “Chang Xin he ming shiwen,” Wencan 1955.2, 128. 90 Following MWX , 105, n. 1, in reading the character  as ju 居, referring to a settlement. 91 The roles of the terms mie 蔑 and lai 逨 in the preceding clause is problematic. Given the occurrence of the full phrase mieli 蔑歷 later in the inscription, I have rendered mie here as “recounting [merits”; for another likely case of mie by itself serving the function of mieli 蔑歷, see the Tian Wang gui inscription, translated in chapter 3. Given the connections between mie and fa 發, however (on which see the discussion of mieli in chapter 4), the single mie here could mean that the king “sent Chang Xin out.” As for the lai 逨, the rendering here is based on Ma Chengyuan’s reading of the character as equivalent to lai 勑 and his reading of that character as “work” or “service”; see MWX , 105, n. 3. There were, however, people active in the Zhou heartland with the name Lai (the commissioner of the Shi Lai ding [2464-5] and the Shi Lai jiao [9063], for example), and it is possible that the ji 即 here meant that the king assigned Chang Xin to bring a person by that name to the Elder of Jing. For an

258

false. 92 Chang Xin’s merits were recounted.93 [Chang Xing] dares in response to praise the great and brilliant beneficence of the Son of Heaven, thereby beginning and making a revered vessel. (Chang Xin he 長甶盉 [9455])

The king began the Chang Xin he event assemblage with a hospitality event, followed by

an archery meet in which a royal employee (the Grand Invoker) faced off against the elder of the

Jing lineage ( Jingbo 井伯). The Chang Xin he inscription does not state explicitly that the meet was a competition. 94 However, the assessment that the Elder of Jing, one of the main participants, was “greatly reverent and not false” suggests that Chang Xin was assigned to monitor the Elder during the proceedings, implying that the shooting had a competitive aspect.

After the shooting, Chang Xin received an official recounting of merits that may have come at the king’s hand or may have been performed by the Elder of Jing at the king’s behest. Either way, Chang Xin attributed the impetus behind the recounting to the king in the latter portion of the inscription commissioned to commemorate the event.

The Chang Xin he event brought together elites who were close to the royal house in both geographic and political terms. The Grand Invoker was a direct employee of the royal house, and the role of the Jing lineage of which the Elder of Jing was head in the courtly politics of the middle Western Zhou period is well documented. 95 Chang Xin seems to have been a royal

functionary, based on his role in the archery meet; the discovery of the vessel in a tomb in

example in which ji 即 served a similar function, see its use (also in combination with yi 以) in the inscription of the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839). 92 Here I follow MWX ’s reading of the characters rendered in AS as shi mi 氏彌 as qi yin 祇寅, meaning “greatly reverent,” and of jian 姦 as “false”; see MWX , 105, n. 4. 93 The inscription is ambiguous as to whether the Elder of Jing or the king recounted Chang Xin’s merits. I suspect that the Elder did so at the king’s behest. Other examples of this phenomenon occur in the inscriptions; see the discussion of mieli in this chapter. 94 For an inscription that directly describes the competitive element of a royal archery meet, see the Zhabo gui 柞伯簋 (NA0076), translated and discussed in chapter 4. 95 On the Grand Invoker, see the discussion of the term zhu 祝 in chapter 2. On the Jing lineage of the middle Western Zhou period, see Wang Hui, “Xi Zhou jinei diming xiaoji,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1985.3, 26-31, esp. 26-7; Lu Liancheng, “Xi Zhou Ze guo shiji jiqi xiangguan wenti,” in Xi Zhou shi yanjiu , Xi’an: 1984, 232-48, esp. 236 (fig.); Zhu Fenghan, Shang Zhou jiazu xingtai yanjiu , 368-9.

259

Puducun, Chang’an county, Shaanxi, near the capitals of Feng and Hao, tends to confirm that

assertion. 96 The sequence of the event assembly reflected this assumption. Like the Mai fangzun sequence, it began with the royal provision of hospitality, suggesting that the participants were already seen as having acquiesced to the royal project (or, to put it in Callon’s terms, as being

“enrolled” in the Zhou identity as arbitrated by the king). 97 The archery meet, however, still created a dynamic of competition between royal and local representatives which, judging from

Chang Xin’s involvement, potentially required arbitration. As a whole, the ritual event assemblage thus progressed along a continuum from lesser to greater differentiation, beginning with the collective enjoyment of royal hospitality, progressing to a competition between members of the collective, and ending up – at least in the inscription’s narrative – with the singling out of an individual for official recognition. 98

A similar event commemorated in the inscription of the Ehou Yufang ding (2810), a much later vessel, saw the king personally face the Marquis of E ( Ehou ) in an archery match held on the way back from a successful campaign to the south: 99

王南征，伐角、僪，唯還自征，才（在）坏，噩（鄂）侯（馭）方內（納）壺于王，乃（祼）之。（馭）方（侑）王。王休宴，乃射，（馭）方 （會）王射。（馭）方休闌，王宴，咸酓（飲），王（親）易（賜）（馭）

96 On the location of discovery of the vessel, see “Chang’an Puducun Xi Zhou mu fajue.” 97 On the concept of enrollment, see Callon, “Some elements of a sociology of translation,” 211-4. 98 This model of course reflects Chang Xin’s interests in the narrative of the ritual assembly. It is entirely likely that others besides Chang Xin were honored after the archery meet, whether for their performance in the shooting (as in the Zhabo ding inscription) or, like Chang Xin, for other services rendered. Still, the separate recognition of a variety of individuals would not hinder the sequence of differentiation. 99 The Ehou Yufang ding is generally recognized to date to the reign of King Yi or King Li; see Shirakawa, vol. 3a, no. 142, 260-9; MWX, p. 280; Shaugnnessy, Sources , 178; Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 103, n. 37. Li has suggested that the anachronistic shape of the vessel reflects its production in a regional workshop; see Li Feng, “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders: Evidence from the Bronze Inscriptions of the Western Zhou Period (1045- 771 B.C.), Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 74 (June 2002), 210-42.

260

方玉五嗀、馬四匹、矢五束，（馭）方拜手首，敢[對揚]100 天子不（丕）顯休 （釐），[用]101 乍（作）鼎，其邁（萬）年子孫永寶用。 The king campaigned to the south and attacked Jiao and Ju. 102 Returning from his campaign, the king was at Pei. The Marquis of E, the Border Protector, 103 presented a hu -vessel 104 to the king and then performed guan -libation. 105 The Border Protector toasted(?) the king. 106 The king awarded a feast 107 and then conducted archery. The Border Protector paired with the king to perform archery. The Border Protector struck the target (frame?). 108 The king feasted 109 and, when finished, hosted drinking. The king personally gave the Border Protector five jue -units of jade, 110 four horses, and five

100 I have added these characters to the transcription to fill lacunae, as does MWX , 281; they follow the usual format of such lines in the bronze inscriptions. 101 See previous note. 102 On these locations see MWX , 281, n. 1. 103 I follow Li Feng in translating the title yufang as Border Protector. See “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” 222-3; see also Xia Hanyi, “Shi Yufang,” Guwenzi yanjiu 9 (1984), 97-109. 104 While the AS database, along with Liu Yu, reads the character here as hu 壶, many scholars, including Chen Mengjia, Shirakawa, and Ma Chengyuan, take it as feng 豐, representing the character li 醴, meaning “drinking” or “sweet wine.” See Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115; Duandai 154, 217; Shirakawa 142, 264; MWX , 281. My sense is that the relatively simple character appearing in this inscription is more readily identifiable with hu (taken here from the Zuo Lü hu 作旅壺 [9519]) than with the relatively complicated feng (several examples of which appear in chapter 3, fig. 3.1). Neither is a close match, and it is possible that the character was meant as a different word entirely. 105 Duandai , 218, and Shirakawa 142, 264, agree with AS in reading this character as guan 祼. In this regard, Duandai follows Wang Guowei, “Shi ‘you,’” Guantang bieji, in Wang Guowei yishu , Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1983, vol. 4, 5-6. Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115, and MWX , 281, refrain from identifying the character, though Ma’s explanation of the clause implies a definition of yin 飲, “to drink.” 106 The character here rendered you 侑 is sometimes given as you 宥 (see Duandai 154, 217-8; Wang Guowei, “Shi ‘you,’” 5.); Some scholars feel that it indicates that the Marquis of E toasted the king (see Wang Guowei, “Shi ‘you,’” 6; Duandai 154, 217). Shirakawa suggests that it meant “to present”; see 142, 264. MWX , 281, identifies it as 侑 and glosses it as bao 報, “to repay,” based on the “Shi gu” chapter of the Erya . I have tentatively followed the first reading here. 107 The use of the term xiu 休 in this inscription is complex. Duandai 154, 218, and MWX , 281, n. 5, agree in taking xiu yan 休宴 here to mean that the feast stopped; Duandai explains this with a gloss from the “Shi gu” chapter of the Erya equating xiu with xi 息. Shirakawa 142, 264, takes this first xiu in its more usual meaning of “to give.” 108 Duandai , 219, and Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115, both take the xiu here to refer to the striking of the arrow; though their explanations differ; Duandai sees a connection between the words xiu and zhong 中 based on their use as names in certain bronze inscriptions, while Liu Yu cites the Shuowen gloss of xiu as “to stop.” Duandai , however, drawing on a gloss of lan 闌 from the “Shi gu” as zhe 遮, “cover,” suggests that the Marquis hit the target, while Liu Yu, citing the Shuowen gloss of the same character as men zhe 門遮, “door cover,” holds that the Marquis hit the frame holding the target and, further, that he did so intentionally in order to let the Zhou king win. Shirakawa, meanwhile, takes the phrase to mean simply that the result of the Marquis’s shooting was good; see 124, 264-6. MWX, 281, n. 6, takes it to mean that the archery performance ended; Li Feng renders the phrase similarly in “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” 222-3. I see no grounds for choosing between these interpretations based on current evidence. 109 Some scholars read the yan 宴, “feast,” here as a different character; see Duandai , 217, 219; Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115-6. Liu Yu in particular takes this character to mean that the king missed the target high. In his discussion of the irregular calligraphy of the inscription, however, Li Feng identifies this as a miswritten incidence of yan 宴; see “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” 228. I have followed that reading here. 110 For the reading of this character as jue 珏, referring to a combination of two jade pieces, see MWX , 281, n. 8.

261

bundles of arrows. The Border Protector bowed and struck his head, daring [in response to praise] the greatly brilliant and beneficent gift of the Son of Heaven; [he] therewith makes a revered ding -cauldron. May [his] sons and grandsons for ten thousand years eternally treasure and use [it]. (Ehou Yufang ding 鄂侯馭方鼎 [2810])

The Marquis of E is well-known from late Western Zhou bronze inscriptions as a figure

of significant influence in the southern reaches of the Zhou sphere of influence, as befits his

additional title of “Border Protector.” 111 The relations of E with the Zhou court were apparently

complex. On the one hand, a Marquis of E at some point provided a daughter as a bride for the

Zhou king, as recorded in the Ehou gui 鄂侯簋 (3929-30); on the other hand, shortly after the

campaign mentioned in the above inscription, the Marquis would lead a rebellion of southern

peoples in a major attack against the Zhou heartland. 112

Certain points in the ritual sequence recorded in the Yufang ding inscription bespeak

awareness on both sides of the instability of political ties between Zhou and E. On his arrival,

the Marquis presented a vessel of liquor to the king, performed a libation, and toasted the king

(presumably with his own liquor). Only once the Marquis had offered these gestures did the

king see fit to provide hospitality in the form of a feast; this is in contrast with the Chang Xin he

account, in which royally sponsored feasting with drinking was the beginning of the sequence.

The Marquis apparently had to confirm his loyalty with this gesture in order to be considered

part of the group by virtue of sharing in the king’s hospitality. Once this was, done, however, the

king saw fit to match himself against the Border Protector in an archery match rather than

assigning him a partner, as in the Chang Xin he event; this can be read as either an

acknowledgement of the Marquis’ importance or an effort to allow the king to compare

111 For additional inscriptional evidence on the state of E 鄂, see “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” 228-30; Li Xueqin, “Lun Zhou chu de E guo,” Zhonghua wenshi luncong 2008.4, 1-8. 112 See “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” pp. 223-4; Landscape and Power , 103-5; Shaughnessy, ed., New Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of Inscriptions and Manuscripts , Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1997, 82-4.

262

favorably with him. More feasting and drinking followed afterward. The king then personally

gave the Border Protector gifts, again suggesting an effort to acknowledge his relative

importance.

The degree of personal involvement of the king in the Yufang ding event framed the

interaction as a direct connection between the Border Protector and the king, rather than situating

the Border Protector within an envisioned system of in-group relationships as in the Chang Xin

he event. The Marquis’s initial presentation of a gift before the provision of hospitality suggests

doubt about his degree of enrollment that needed to be assuaged on both sides. The lack of

description of the king’s performance in the shooting (depending on one’s reading of the relevant

characters) likewise puts the focus on integrating the Marquis into the activities of the Zhou

forces rather than creating differentiation between him and other Zhou adherents. In general, the

event sequence suggests a tentative contact between parties of relatively equal status rather than

an effort at internal management of assumed subordinates.

The prior descriptions of ritual archery events in this chapter emphasized the efforts of

the Zhou royal house to perpetuate the collective of Zhou identity and its own role in that

collective. Undoubtedly, the royal desire to create enduring relations with adherents played a

vital role in the staging of the Ehou Yufang ding event, and the king’s reception of the Marquis seems to have created a temporary rapprochement between the two leaders. 113 The behavior of the Marquis in the beginning of the narrative, however, is unusual compared with the other accounts considered here. By presenting a gift to the king and, in particular, by toasting him before the beginning of the feast, the Marquis encroaches on roles that in inscriptional narratives

113 As we know from the inscription of the Yu ding , this rapprochement soon dissolved into one of the worst conflicts of the late Western Zhou period. On the Yu ding , see Xu Zhongshu, “Yu ding de niandai jiqi xiangguan wenti,” Kaogu xuebao 1959.3, 53-67; Shirakawa 27:162, 451-2; MWX , 281-3; Sources , 179; Landscape and Power, 103, n. 37.

263

are usually reserved for the Zhou king himself. 114 Li Feng has suggested, based on its formal

characteristics, that the Ehou Yufang ding itself was probably produced in E rather than in the

Zhou heartland. 115 These points suggest that the Border Protector was himself able to leverage

the opportunity provided by the ritual event assembly for the materialization of his own idealized

status; 116 he engaged the Zhou king in competition over the ritual narrative. 117

The Yi hegai and Ehou Yufang ding were products of the Zhou king’s travels outside his

central realm of control; as recorded in each of their inscriptions, the performance of archery

brought together representatives of the royal party/central government (the Supervisors and

zheng in the Yi hegai case, the king himself in the Ehou Yufang ding inscription) and regional-

level rulers (the bangjun and zhuhou of the Yi hegai inscription, the Border Protector Marquis

of E himself in the latter case) in a context of simultaneous hospitality, cooperation, and

competition. 118 In his interactions with these powerful border elites, the king advertised the benefits of adherence to the royal house by providing hospitality in the form of liquor and honoring subordinates with methods of official recognition such as the mieli ceremony staged for

Yi. At the same time, he demonstrated the royal government’s maintenance of the martial

tradition of archery and, by extension, its continued military might and relevance within the

Zhou sociopolitical sphere, thus discouraging distant power-holders from breaking away from

114 Gifts to rather than from patrons are not completely unheard of in the inscriptions. The reward occasioning the commissioning of the Jin ding 堇鼎 (2703) was given in thanks for the vessel commissioner’s delivery of a gift from the rulers of Yan to the Duke of Shao in the Zhou heartland; see Liulihe , 105; Landscape and Power , 335-6. To my knowledge, however, the Ehou Yufang ding is the only inscription recording a gift given directly to the Zhou king. As for the prerogative of toasting, the account of the Xiao Yu ding inscription above offers an example in which the first toasts were proposed by rather than to the king. 115 Li Feng, “Literacy Crossing Cultural Boundaries,” 225. 116 On the materialization of ideology as a competitive ground, see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, 16. 117 Provided that the vessel was in fact produced in E, the Marquis would have had the freedom to emphasize aspects of the narrative casting him as a driving agent in the ritual sequence. 118 On the reading of the title yufang 馭方, see Xia Hanyi, “Shi Yufang,” 97-109.

264

the Zhou state project. 119 The interaction between the royal house and central government (as represented by the Grand Invoker) and the Elder of Jing, recorded in the Chang Xin he inscription, was probably similarly motivated; though the homeland of the Jing lineage was geographically close to the royal domain, the Jing kinship group enjoyed substantial influence in the politics of the middle Western Zhou era, such that management of relations with them must have been a key concern of King Mu’s reign. 120

The inscription of the celebrated Jing gui 靜簋 (4273), one of the main pieces of evidence for the institutional teaching of archery at the royal court, describes the involvement of specific important elite lineage members in a supervisory capacity. 121 It thus provides an image

of the conjunction between the education of elite youths in archery and the use of archery meets

for political purposes by the Zhou royal house:

隹（唯）六月初吉，王才（在）京，丁卯，王令靜（司）射學宮，小子眔服、眔小臣、眔尸僕學射。八月初吉庚寅，王（以）吳ȼ、呂 （豳） （師）、邦周射于大池，靜學無 （尤），王易（賜）靜鞞 ，靜敢拜首，對揚天子不（丕）顯休，用乍（作）文母外姞尊簋，子子孫孫其萬年用。 It was the sixth month, the chuji moon phase; the king was at the Pang Capital. On the dingmao day, the king ordered Jing to take charge of archery at the Study Palace. The scions, servants, petty ministers, and Yi-servants studied archery. In the eighth month, during the chuji moon phase, on the gengyin day, the king led Wu Hui and Lü Gang to meet with the Bin X Armies and the states of Zhou to perform archery at the Grand Pond. 122 Jing’s instruction was without problems. The king presented Jing with a knife

119 In the case of the Marquis of E, this effort was ultimately unsuccessful, in that the Marquis staged an unsuccessful rebellion shortly thereafter. Rather than contradicting the argument, however, the sequence of events suggests that King Li was aware, during his southern campaign, of the need to shore up the loyalty of the rulers of E, and that he chose an archery meet as the vehicle for that effort. 120 See chapter 2, note 226. 121 The Jing gui is part of the Sackler collection of bronzes; see Sackler , 424-9; MWX, 111. It appeared first in Xiqing 27.14. See also note 83. 122 Ma Chengyuan reads the phrase bin x shi （豳）師 as a personal name here, based on a line from the inscription of the Qi gui (4266) which reads 命汝作師家司馬, and the phrase bang zhou 邦周 as a personal name by analogy; see MWX, 111, n. 4. This reading has the virtue of matching up Wu Hui and Lü Gang, two individuals, with another two individuals. However, the placement of the word shi 師 at the end rather than the beginning of a name would be unusual. I suspect that the 師 of the Qi gui and the 師 of the Yi hegai both refer to the location known as the Bin Encampment, referred to also in the inscription of the Shan ding 善丁

265

with tassel and scabbard. 123 Jing dares to bow and strike his head, praising the Son of Heaven’s great and brilliant beneficence in response, therewith making for his cultured mother Wai Ji a revered gui -vessel; may his sons’ sons and grandsons’ grandsons use it for ten thousand years.

Jing’s commissioning of the vessel was occasioned by a reward the king gave him for his successful training of a variety of lower-status groups, including the aforementioned “scions”

(xiaozi ) and “petty ministers” ( xiaochen ), in preparation for an archery meet. 124 The specified participants in the event were not limited to these groups, however, nor were they the focus of the record. The inscription instead emphasizes the participation of lineage members Wu Hui and

Lü Gang, as well as of parties specified only as political entities: the “states of Zhou” ( Zhou bang

周邦) and the “Bin X Army[ies]” or “Bin X Encampment[s]” ( Bin X shi ). 125 Nor are Jing’s

protégés praised for their excellence at archery, as the Elder of Zha was in the events of his

eponymous inscription; instead, Jing is rewarded because his students simply carried off the

event “without problems” ( wu you 無尤). The overall sense is that, from the royal perspective, the actions of the scions, servants, petty ministers, etc. were important mainly as a background

(2820):

令汝佐胥 侯，監師戍 I command you to assist the Marquis of X in overseeing the garrison of the Bin Encampment…

The appointment described in the Qian gui inscription would then be to “serve as Supervisor of Horse for the household[s] of the Bin Encampment.” By extension, the phrase bangzhou in the Yi hegai inscription probably referred to a location as well, perhaps analogous to the more common zhoubang , or “states of Zhou” (appearing, for example, in the inscriptions of the Ke ding 克鼎 [2836] and the Hong gui 訇簋 [4321]). The relationship between Wu Hui and Lü Gang on the one side, and these two locations on the other, is difficult to determine from the syntax of the inscription. It may be that these two competed against single representatives from the two locations in archery; perhaps the king designated Wu and Lü as leaders of the two “teams” in the competition; or, alternatively, perhaps Wu and Lü were merely “used” by the king to bring the two factions together in the archery meet and did not personally participate. 123 Following MWX in the reading of 鞘; see MWX , 111, n. 6. 124 On the question of the identity of the “scions” ( xiaozi 小子) and the “petty ministers” ( xiaochen 小臣), see Wang Longzheng et al, “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” pp. 55-7. For a detailed consideration of the relative status of various xiaochen during the Western Zhou period, see Zhang and Liu, 43-5; on xiaozi , see 45-7. 125 Wu Hui and Lü Gang are likely the Wu and Lü known from the Ban gui 班簋 (4341) inscription. See Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1114; MWX , 108-11, esp. 109, n. 7-8; 111, n. 4.

266

context for the interaction between the royal representatives Wu Hui and Lü Gang on the one

hand, and those of the semi-independent Zhou states and the Bin X Encampment on the other.

All told, then, the Western Zhou inscriptions contain traces of several different but

complementary motives for the ceremonial performance of archery competitions at major events.

Certainly, archery meets provided a venue for young, powerful Zhou elites such as Zhabo to

achieve public recognition and win rewards from the Zhou royal house. The desire to prepare

young aristocrats for these endeavors led to institutionalized education in the proper performance

of archery, which itself created opportunities for excellence and recognition in both the

preparation of participants for ritual events and the maintenance of dedicated facilities for the

purpose; the inscriptions of the Jing gui , the Shi Tangfu ding 師湯父鼎 (2780), and the Kuang you 匡卣 (5423) record this phenomenon. 126 However, the bulk of inscriptional records of actual

archery meets focus less on the performance of the lesser participants (scions, petty servants, etc.)

and more on the accompanying ceremonies and other opportunities created for interaction

between the Zhou king, high-ranking Zhou state officials, and powerful rulers and administrators

of local polities. The Ling ding and Jing gui , in which “scions” ( xiaozi ) participated but were not

singled out, both record archery meets that followed this model, as do several inscriptions –

those of the Yi hegai , the Chang Xin he , and the Ehou Yufang ding – in which scions are not

mentioned. The Yi hegai and the Ehou Yufang ding in particular commemorate events that took

place on the periphery of the Zhou cultural sphere, in or near areas which repeatedly caused

military difficulties for the Zhou royal house. 127

126 Shi Tangfu ding 師湯父鼎 (2780), Kuang you 匡卣 (5423). 127 On the rebellion of the Marquis of E, see note 113. The state of Lu, where the events recorded in the Yi hegai inscription took place, was in the western portion of Shandong province, in the eastern reaches of the Zhou state. A conflict between the royal house and the regional state of Qi, in the area just east of Lu, occurred during the reign of King Yi. See Landscape and Power , 97-9.

267

In addition to its benefits as a method of education/indoctrination and a venue for young

Zhou elites to seek recognition outside existing models of employment and patronage, then,

group competition in archery was one of the more commonly recorded diplomatic tools in the

Zhou royal arsenal. 128 Institutionalized instruction in archery thus would seem to have been a necessary component of preparation for official and/or military service on the Zhou periphery, where the ability to acquit oneself in high-pressure contexts of simultaneous rivalry and cooperation could directly affect the ongoing relations between local power-holders making up the Zhou state.

4.3.3: Summary and further discussion

Sources from the late Shang period show that the Shang kings occasionally engaged in

public demonstrations of their prowess with the bow. As portrayed in our most detailed record,

the Zuoce Ban gui , this process took place on a body of water, involved the shooting of animals

that may or may not have been prepared as fixed targets, and included chances for other elite

bowmen to participate with the king and to win rewards for their performance. The inscriptions

of the Mai fangzun and the Bo Tangfu ding show that early Western Zhou kings adopted many

elements of this practice. They conducted ceremonial shooting sessions on the biyong pond;

they killed animals in the process; and they provided opportunities for visiting elites to take part.

Certain distinctions in the process, however, bespeak a different approach to the strategic

implementation of ritual shooting demonstrations as a political tool. Where the Zuoce Ban gui

event bagged a cosmologically significant turtle, the Zhou royal demonstrations targeted birds in

one case and a variety of prepared animal targets in another. The choice of the central and

cosmologically significant space of the biyong pond, however, strengthened the mimetic efficacy

128 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1116.

268

of the ritual, allowing the movements of the Zhou king to the extremes of the pond to make a

statement about the effective reach of the royal house’s military power. Shooting animals at the

edges of the pond, while probably a practical necessity, thus took on the aspect of the killing or

subjugation of populations on the borders of the Zhou sphere of influence. The shooting of the

“evil ministers” during King Wu’s triumphal return ceremonies, as described in the “Shi fu”

chapter of the Yizhoushu , seems to have followed the same model, arguing simultaneously for the identity of the Shang as an “out-group” rather than the cultural predecessors of the Zhou and for the Zhou capital as center versus Yin as periphery. 129 Likewise, the following along of

visiting elites recalled the origins of the royal house as leaders of a military coalition that

succeeded in its rebellion against the Shang. In some cases, this may even have been the first

chance for particular elites to take part in a “campaign” led by the Zhou king. 130

The approach of the early Zhou kings to the performance of ritual archery demonstrations

on water thus put much heavier emphasis on the cosmological associations of the process,

portraying the site of the ritual as a microcosm of the Zhou state. This retooling emphasized the

role of the Zhou homeland and the Zhou kings as conceptual center of the new state order, an

understandable departure from the practices of the late Shang kings, whose status as such was

well-established. It also betrays a conception of the Zhou state as a bounded, geographically

129 Geopolitical realities would soon change that approach, as the Zhou determined the need to construct a new base of operations in the vicinity of the former Shang capital. The events of the “Shi fu” account (for which see Huang Huaixin, Yizhoushu jiaopu zhuyi , 210-21), however, predate that determination. The effort to establish Feng/Hao as ideological center of the new order, with Shang-heritage prisoners at the periphery representative of Yin, recalls the organization of the Inka capital of Tawantinsuyu (Cuzco), wherein the positions of populations settled around the city center reiterated the positions of their homeland within the Inka empire, thus establishing the capital as a microcosm of the empire as a whole. See John Hyslop, Inka Settlement Planning , Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990, 62-5; Waldemar Espinoza Soriano, Los Incas: economía, sociedad, y Estado en el era de Tawantinsuyo, Lima: Amaru, 1987, 319-21; DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, 19, 29. 130 The Marquis of Xing, mentioned in the Mai fangzun inscription, was a new appointee to that position; his advancement presumably betokened either a progression of authority within his family (i.e., his succession of his deceased father as lineage head) or a grant of additional authority to his lineage from the king. The language of the inscription is unfortunately not specific enough to allow a determination between these possibilities. A full translation of the inscription appears in the following chapter.

269

delimited territory, internally placid, the borders of which could be controlled with sufficient

effort. Over the course of the Western Zhou period, the central portion of the Zhou state would

grow closer to this conceptual ideal, as demographic expansion reduced the space between the

territory of individual lineages, forcing the royal house to resort to piecemeal grants of land as a

tool of political reward. 131 Its pursuit seems to have been a concern of the Zhou kings from early

in the period, however, and to have driven the delegatory element of the Zhou political model

that made possible the rapid expansion of the early Western Zhou period. 132

In fact, the ritual shooting demonstration recorded in the Mai fangzun inscription was specifically connected with just such a delegatory event, namely the assignation of Mai’s patron to control the territory of Xing. The degree of involvement afforded to the non-royal participants in the Mai fangzun and Bo Tangfu ding events is thus also of interest. While the Zuoce Ban gui records that the Shang king’s attendants took part in the shooting of the turtle in question, the da feng/li sequences described in the Western Zhou vessels make no specific suggestion that the non-royal participants of honor took an active part in the shooting.

On the occasion of the rite depicted in the Mai fangzun inscription, the king had just assigned the Marquis as the primary power-holder and Zhou representative in a more or less far- flung region. The project of state expansion pursued by the earliest Western Zhou kings (Kings

Wu, Cheng, and Kang in particular) relied on the delegation of nigh-absolute control over

131 On the shrinkage of royal land grants as a manifestation of this process, see Bureaucracy , 36-7; Landscape and Power , 122-7. 132 For instance, in the inscription of the Yihou Ze gui , the king consults a map as he assigns the territory to Yihou Ze, showing a specific concern with territory covered by the grant, despite the fact that the grant itself is described in terms of populations contained; see Bureaucracy , 238-41. Li Feng points out that, though the Zhou kings conceived of their state from a territorial standpoint, their state-building efforts focused on full military control – that is, the ability to defend any part of the state at any time – rather than on administrative control; see ibid., 288- 9. This is precisely the thrust of the mimetic argument made by the da feng/li rite. On the delegatory model of state authority in the Western Zhou, see ibid., 294-9.

270

outlying areas to trusted representatives on a semi-permanent and semi-hereditary basis. 133

When, as occasionally happened, those representatives rebelled, the results were historically formative moments of crisis for the Zhou state. 134 It is hardly surprising that, when abrogating authority in this fashion, the early Zhou kings sought out ritual counterbalances to the delegation process, ways to persuade adherents that their own presence, their own control, still encompassed the whole of the domain to which the state laid claim. The ceremonial demonstration of archery by the Zhou king on the biyong pond was one such method. It is natural that the king, facing the

necessity of ceding practical power over an area to a potential rival, would wish to maintain his

monopoly on symbolic power over the entire realm. To cast further participants in the da feng/li rite as followers/observers was a step toward such a monopoly.

The few surviving records of individual royal demonstrations of archery are associated with the da feng/li rite and confined mainly to the reigns of the first few Western Zhou kings. 135

Toward the end of this period, as the balance of the Zhou state project shifted from establishment and expansion to consolidation and maintenance, the royal house began a program of institutionally sponsored archery competitions, along with the educational infrastructure necessary to support their performance. The events of the Zhabo gui inscription, the earliest record of such an event, probably date to the King Kang-King Zhao period; as Liu Yu has elsewhere noted, inscriptional records of archery meets reached their heyday during the reign of

133 On the degree of authority of regional lords under the Western Zhou model, see Bureaucracy , chapter 6, 235-70, esp. 245. 134 See note 127. 135 The Mai fangzun probably dates to around the reign of King Kang; see MWX, 46; Shirakawa, vol. 1b, 628-46 (Shirakawa suggests its dating to the latter years of King Cheng or the early years of King Kang). On the dating of the Bo Tangfu ding , see the translation and discussion of its inscription in chapter 3. Other vessels referring to the da feng/li process – the Tian Wang gui and the He zun – date to the reigns of Kings Wu and Cheng, respectively; these vessels do not, however, explicitly mention shooting as a part of the sequence. For a more detailed discussion of these dates, see the section on the da feng/li rite.

271

King Mu, but at least one record of a royally sponsored archery meet – that in the Ehou Yufang

ding inscription – survives from the late Western Zhou.136

While the early Western Zhou royal shooting demonstrations arrogated most of the conceptual weight of the process to the king himself, royally sponsored archery competitions welcomed and, indeed, mandated the participation of a wide spectrum of Zhou elites. These took place both at specially prepared locations in the heartland of Zhou royal control and on the far eastern and southern periphery of the Zhou cultural sphere. Usually, these meets paired direct affiliates of the royal court with semi-independent power-holders such as regional rulers and heads of prominent lineages. Those held within the royal area of control might also include

“scions,” a fact which has been taken to indicate the use of archery as an educational framework. 137 Some such cases also admitted the involvement of xiaochen , “petty ministers,” perhaps, as Liu suggests, in an organizational capacity. 138

Beyond the simple hospitality provided, archery meets offered a number of potential

benefits to non-royal participants. Archers had the opportunity to distinguish themselves based

on their performance of what was still, during the Western Zhou period, a core military skill,

without requiring the pretext of a campaign action. In addition to the prestige of recognition,

they might obtain concrete, material rewards, as in the Zhabo gui event. Participation placed

them close to the center of Zhou power – geographically in cases of meets conducted in the Zhou

heartland, politically in those cases associated with royal journeys. It afforded non-local

aristocrats a chance for direct contact with the Zhou king. For some more powerful aristocrats –

regional rulers such as the Marquis of E, for example – this would allow a public reiteration of

the relations that implicitly underlay their authority. Others of lesser standing, particularly those

136 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1116-7. 137 Wang Longzheng et al., “Zhabo gui yu da sheli ji Xi Zhou jiaoyu zhidu,” esp. 60. 138 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1118.

272

who served distant lords such as the Dukes of Lu or the Marquises of E, might otherwise have

little or no chance for contact with the king; archery meets thus afforded them unprecedented

opportunities to achieve distinction outside of established local hierarchies.

From the royal perspective, sponsoring archery meets created a point of contact between

central representatives directly responsible to the king, and regional lords and powerful lineage

heads who owed allegiance to the Zhou state but enjoyed substantial autonomy. 139 The

established context of competition directed the instincts and efforts of these potentially opposed

groups, providing a venue of controlled violence for the negotiation of relative status. 140 The capacity for participants to win rewards and recognition encouraged an understanding of the king as linchpin of the state and source of both material and immaterial wealth, even among those elites who had little contact with the Zhou royal house; this allowed the king to insert himself into the patronage relationships making up Zhou society at the local level. Combined with the establishment of institutionalized instruction in archery for elite youths, these strategies engaged non-royal elites in the process of “enrollment” in the Zhou state and cultural project; that is to say, they encouraged non-royal elites to expend energy and resources in perfecting skills of

139 On the autonomy of Western Zhou regional lords, see n. 113; on the Jing lineage, see n. 100. 140 As a competitive group activity with associations of violence and broad cultural penetration, the Mesoamerican ballgame provides fertile ground for comparison with ritual archery. For an account of the ballgame as an instantiation and perpetuation of boundaries between territories and groups, see Susan D. Gillespie, “Ballgames and Boundaries,” in Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox, eds., The Mesoamerican Ballgame , Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1991, 317-46. On the ballgame as a venue of controlled competition between elites, see Robert S. Santley, Michael J. Berman, and Rani T. Alexander, “The Politicization of the Mesoamerican Ballgame and its Implications for the Interpretation of the Distribution of Ballcourts in Central Mexico,” in ibid., 1-25, esp. 14-7. On the ballgame as a tool of political and cultural merging of center and periphery, see John W. Fox, Maya Postclassic State Formation: Segmentary Lineage Migration in Advancing Frontiers, Cambridge: 1987, 246-54, cited in J. Jefferson MacKinnon and Emily M. May, “The Ballcourts of C’hacben K’ax and its Neighbors: the Maya Ballgame and the Late Classic Colonial Impulse in Southern Belize,” in Gerard W. van Bussel, Paul L.F. van Dongen, and Ted J.J. Leyenaar, The Mesoamerican Ballgame: Papers presented at the International Colloquium ‘The Mesoamerican Ballgame 2000 BC-AD 2000,’ Leiden, June 30 th -July 3 rd , 1988 , Leiden: Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde, 1991, 71-80, esp. 79-80. See also E. Michael Whittington, ed., The Sport of Life and Death: The Mesoamerican Ballgame , Charlotte: Mint Museumof Art in conjunction with Thames and Hudson, 2001.

273

importance to the Zhou king 141 and argued for an understanding of the king as the origin point, if not the sole immediate source, of prestige and recognition. 142

Royally sponsored archery meets began in the late phase of the early Western Zhou or the early phase of the middle Western Zhou. 143 Their traces in the inscriptions are concentrated mainly around the reign of King Mu. Noting this concentration, Liu Yu ties it to the newfound peace that settled over the realm at that time. 144 Recent work has cast this era in a very different light. The preceding reign of King Zhao, it has long been known, was cut short by the killing of that king and the routing of his armies at points south. 145 Li Feng has recently shown that the reign of King Mu saw a retaliatory incursion of southern populations into Zhou territory, as well as a royal attack against the “Western Rong” or “Dog Rong” populations dwelling on the western Zhou flank that set the precedent for a dynasty-long enmity between the two peoples. 146

To suggest that archery meets were a product of peacetime idleness thus contradicts new understandings about the Western Zhou historical sequence. I would put forth the alternate theory that intensification and institutionalization of royally sponsored archery was meant to shore up relations between the royal apparatus and its more powerful adherents in a time of crisis.

141 Not archery in its own right so much as the capacity to compete with rivals in a controlled environment of hospitality without unpleasantness; that is to say, diplomatic skill. 142 There is a distinction to be made here from Callon’s “obligatory passage point” model, in that, as portrayed in the performance of archery and of the mieli rite, the king retained the capacity to delegate the distribution of prestige to a secondary party, what might be called an “optional passage point.” Hence, for example, in the inscription of the Chang Xin he , after participating in an archery meet, the Elder of Jing is involved in the recounting of Chang Xin’s merits. Since the Zhou kings relied on designated rulers for the administration of outlying regions, this power of delegated prestige distribution was a necessary component of their strategy of governance. The desire to control it more closely was one of the factors driving the introduction and expansion of the official appointment ceremony. This point will be elaborated upon in the Conclusion. 143 This is based on the possiblity of a King Zhao date for the Zhabo gui , a feasible dating based on physical comparisons with other vessels and on the mode of dating used in the inscription. See Wang Longzheng et al, “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi,” 53-4; although Wang Longzheng et al. suggest a King Kang dating for the vessel based on the form of the calligraphy and in particular on the appearance of the personage Nangong 南宮 (on whom see n. 88). 144 Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1116-7. 145 On the inscriptional evidence for King Zhao’s campaigns to the south, see notes 18 and 39. For a summary of the received historical evidence, see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 322-3. 146 Li Feng, Landscape and Power , 96-7, 145-6.

274

The reign of King Mu saw the end of the overall project of expansion of the Western Zhou state,

despite Pyrrhic victories against the Quanrong, 147 and the beginning of concomitant shifts in the

ritual instantiation of patronage relations. By creating new opportunities for socialization and

competition between royal partisans and powerful, semi-independent lineage heads, and by

emphasizing the connection of the royal house with military skills and the possibility of

recognition by the king for those skills, archery meets provided a source of prestige that helped

counterbalance the loss of royal campaign largesse inherent in the slowing rate of Zhou military

expansion. 148

4.4: The official appointment ceremony

The middle Western Zhou, and in particular the reign of King Mu, saw the rise of a variety of bronze inscription recording the appointment of the vessel commissioner to an official position by the Zhou king. 149 Earlier kings of course appointed subordinates – the Da Yu ding ,

usually dated to King Kang, commemorates one such case – but inscriptional records of

appointments become both more numerous and more formulaic as of the King Mu era,

suggesting that an organized reform of the official appointment process took place during that

reign. 150 These inscriptions have generally become known as ceming mingwen 册命銘文 or

ceming jinwen 冊命金文, or “appointment inscriptions” in English. 151 Several dedicated

147 Received sources suggest that King Mu was successful in his attacks on the Quanrong; however, the Zhou do not seem to have gained any territory in the process, and the rivalry thus begun with the Quanrong would eventually prove to be the royal house’s undoing. For the classical sources on the origin of this conflict, see the discussion of the Bo Tangfu ding in the previous chapter; for a detailed discussion of the conflicts between the Zhou and the Quanrong/Xianyun, see Landscape and Power , 141-92 and Appendix 2, “The relationship between the Quanrong and the Xianyun,” 343-6. 148 On the slowing of Zhou military expansion during the reign of King Mu, see Bureaucracy , 33-4, 105. 149 Ibid., 36. 150 See ibid., 36. On the date of the Da Yu ding , see chapter 2, note 169. 151 For a review of the history of the study of these inscriptions, see He Shuhuan, Xi Zhou ximing mingwen xin yan , Wenjin, 2007, 28-58. As the title of that work indicates, He Shuhuan employs the term ximing 锡铭 for these

275

treatments of this body of inscriptions and the appointment process they depict have emerged,

particularly over the last ten years. 152 In the meantime, the discovery of Western Zhou bronzes bearing appointment inscriptions has continued apace. One such inscription, that of the recently discovered Jingbo Lu gui 井伯簋, will suffice as an example narrative of the appointment

ritual from the very earliest times of its performance: 153

惟廿有四年九月既望庚寅，王在周，格太室，即位，司工（空）入右，立中庭，北乡（向），王呼作冊尹冊（申）命曰：“更（賡）乃祖服，作冢司馬。汝迺諫訊有 （嫌），取徵十鋝。錫汝赤巿幽黃，金車、金勒、旂。汝迺（敬）夙夕勿法（廢）朕命。汝肇享。“ 拜稽首，敢對揚天子休，用作朕文祖幽伯寶簋，其萬年孫子其永寶用。 It was the twenty-fourth year, the ninth month, the jiwang phase, the gengyin day. The king was at Zhou; he entered the Great Hall and took up his position. Supervisor of Works X entered and served as youzhe for Lu, [who] stood in the center of the hall facing north. The king called upon the Chief Document Maker to extend Lu’s command with documents, saying, “Succeed to the service of your ancestor[s?], serving as Grand Supervisor of Horse.

inscriptions; on this point see also He Shuhuan, “Sishi’er nian Lai ding ‘lai shu,’ ‘ce lai’ shiyi – fu ‘ceming mingwen’ ming shi bianzheng,” Zhengda zhongwen xuebao 2006.12, 75-102, esp. 95-7. The term ceming indicates the use of a document to convey the royal command, which, if taken as a necessary diagnostic component, may disqualify some inscriptions that otherwise follow the pattern. Wang Zhiguo raises the question of the various details of the ceremony as diagnostic criteria in “Sishi’er nian Lai ding suo fanying de Xi Zhou wanqi ceming liyi de bianhua,” in Zhu Fenghan, ed., Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi, 297-304, esp. 299. Li Feng voices a similar objection in Bureaucracy , p. 104, n. 15, reacting to Yoshimoto Michimasa’s restriction of his inquiry into the phenomenon to those inscriptions containing the term ceming itself; for that treatment, see Yoshimoto, “Sei Shuu satsumei kinbun kou,” Shirin 74.5 (1991), 38-66. 152 These include Zhang Guangyu, “Jinwen zhong ceming zhi dian,” Xianggang zhongwen daxue Zhongguo wenhua yanjiusuo xuebao 10.2 (1979); Chen Hanping, Xi Zhou ceming zhidu yanjiu , Xuelin, 1986; Yoshimoto, “Sei Shuu satsumei”; Yang Kuan, “’Ceming li’ de yishi,” in Xi Zhou shi , 820-5; Musha Akira, “Sei Shuu satsumei kinbun bunrui no kokoromi,” in Matsumaru Michio, ed., Sei Shuu seidouki to sono kokka,” Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku, 1980, 49-132; Wang Zhongwen, Xi Zhou ceming jinwen suo jian guanzhi yanjiu , Guoli, 1999; He Shuhuan, Xi Zhou ximing mingwen xin yan . For English-language treatments of the appointment inscriptions, see Virginia Kane, “Aspects of Western Zhou Appointment Inscriptions: the Charge, the Gifts, and the Response,” Early China 8 (1982-3), 14-28; Martin Kern, “The performance of writing in Western Zhou China,” in Sergio La Porta and David Shulman, eds., The poetics of grammar and the metaphysics of sound and sign , Leiden, 2007, 140-51; and particularly Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 103-14. 153 The Jingbo Lu gui was acquired by the National Museum of China in 2005. Both its bird-motif decorations and its association with the figure the Master of Horse, the Elder of Jing, mark it as a middle Western Zhou bronze, dating almost certainly to the reign of King Mu due to the high year-number of its date. On these points, and for images of the bronze and its inscription, see Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.3, and in particular Wang Guanying, “Lu gui kaoshi,” 4-6; Li Xueqin, “Lun Lu gui de niandai,” 7-8; Xia Hanyi, “Cong Lu gui kan Zhou Mu Wang zaiwei nianshu ji niandai wenti,” 9-10; Zhang Yongshan, “Lu gui zuoqizhe de niandai,” 11-3. The transcription given here follows that given by Li Xueqin except where otherwise noted.

276

You must then admonish and inquire where there is wrongdoing, 154 taking an emolument of ten lüe [of bronze]. 155 [I] award you a red kneepad, a dark huang -jade, 156 a bronze chariot, a bronze harness, and a banner. You, then, respectfully day and night refrain from wasting my command! You make the offerings!” Lu bowed and struck his head, daring in response to praise the beneficence of the Son of Heaven. [I] therewith make a precious gui -tureen for my cultured ancestor the Elder of You. May Lu’s grandsons and sons eternally treasure and use [this vessel] for ten thousand years.

The sequence narrated in the Jingbo Lu gui inscription follows the basic model shared by the vast majority of appointment inscriptions. 157 First, the king takes up his position in the ritual

venue. 158 Next, the recipient of the appointment (and so the commissioner of the inscription) is

led or summoned into the appointment venue by the youzhe , or sponsor. 159 The candidate stands in the middle of the hall facing north, i.e., towards the king, with the sponsor to his right. 160 The

154 The transcription and translation here follow Li Xueqin’s reading of the character here rendered  as xian 嫌, the phrase youxian then referring to persons under suspicion; see Li Xueqin, “Lun Lu gui de niandai,” p. 7; Wang Guanying, “Lu gui kaoshi,” pp. 4-5. Wang Guanying reads the phrase as 有, which Tang Lan has elsewhere read as youlin 有鄰, taking it as referring to an aspect of agricultural organization; see Tang Lan, Xi Zhou qingtongqi mingwen fendai shizheng , Zhonghua: 1986, cited in Wang Guanying, “Lu gui kaoshi,” 4-5. 155 On the reading of this phrase as referring to official emoluments, see Wang Guangying, “Lu gui kaoshi,” 5; Chen Hanping, Xi Zhou ceming zhidu yanjiu , 260-2. 156 Reading huang 黃 as huang 璜, as does Wang Guanying, “Lu gui kaoshi”; see 6. 157 See the sources cited in note 153 above for further narrations of the appointment ritual sequence. Many of these, including Bureaucracy , “The Performance of Writing,” and Xi Zhou Shi , draw on late Western Zhou bronzes as basic examples of the ceremony; see 105-7, 141-50, and 820-5, respectively. I therefore present an early case here for comparison. 158 The usual phrase is wang ji wei 王即位, “the king took up his position,” the latter term later becoming a normal expression for the idea of “the throne” in the abstract sense. 159 Youzhe were virtually always of higher status than the parties they “assisted”; see Chen Hanping, 110. It is of note that among the many possible readings of the character you in youzhe is you 右, “right (vs. left),” and many scholars indeed hold that the youzhe stood to the right of the appointee during the ceremony; see Bureaucracy , 107-9. Chen Hanping emphasizes the use of you as a verb or an indicator of location, rather than a personal title, in the inscriptions; see p. 106. 160 Li Feng and Musha Akira have both pointed out that the inscriptions vary as to whether the youzhe entered the hall with the appointee or afterward; see Bureaucracy , 108-9; Musha Akira, 270-6. “To face north” would later become a code for the paying of fealty, just as “to face south” would express the idea of ruling. Consider the following lines from the “Shi xun” chapter of the Yizhoushu :

小寒之日，鴈北向，又五日鵲始巢，又五日雉始雊。鴈不北向，民不懷主，鵲不始巢，國不寧，雉不始雊，國大水。 On the day of the Small Cold, the geese face north; in five days, the magpies start their nests; in five days, the pheasants start calling. If the geese do not face north, then the people do not cherish the lord; if the magpies do not start their nests, the state is not at peace; if the pheasants do not start calling, the country will flood. (Yizhoushu jiaopu, 283-4)

277

king then calls upon the scribe or scribes in attendance to read the official royal command to the

appointee from prepared documents. 161 As in the case cited above, the official command would

include descriptions of both the office the appointee was to occupy and the accoutrements that he

was to be awarded for his service. The appointee then made his obeisances to the king and

left; 162 later, he commissioned a bronze commemorating the occasion, its inscription based

probably on the document of command used during the appointment ceremony. 163

The above steps appear in virtually all accounts of the appointment ritual beginning with the very earliest examples (such as that of the Jingbo Lu gui itself); they constitute the common

core of the ritual maintained throughout the remainder of the Western Zhou period. Beyond

these steps, some inscriptions, particularly of later date, record the appointee’s departure from

the venue and subsequent return to present an item of jade. 164 Some specify as well the participation, if not the location, of a royal scribe, or, in later inscriptions, of two such scribes.165

The discovery of a set of foundations at Yuntang, Fufeng county, Shaanxi, that are commonly taken as the ruin of an ancestral temple has provided a context for the visualization of this set of movements. 166

See also Chen Qiyu, Hanfeizi jishi, Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1974, 28 (“Gong ming”), 507-12, esp. 509; Liang Qixiong, ed., Xunzi jianshi , Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1936, “Ru xiao,” 75-6; Wang Shumin, Zhuangzi jiaozhu , “Tian dao,” 472. To my knowledge, the appointment inscriptions (and that of the Xiao Yu ding ) are the earliest expression of this standard of spatial correspondence. 161 For this interpretation of the role of documents in the process, see Li Feng, “Offices,” 50; Bureaucracy , 109; Kern, “The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China,” 150-1. For a description of the role played by two scribes in the appointment ceremony, see Kern, “The Performance of Writing,” 151. Wang Zhiguo has recently pointed out that the involvement of two scribes is characteristic of late Western Zhou cases; see 299-301. 162 I follow Li Feng in reading the formulaic “expression of gratitude” offered by the appointee as representing an actual utterance and action performed during the ceremony; see Bureaucracy , 110. 163 On this point see Bureaucracy , 110; Kern, 150. 164 On this phenomenon, of which much was made in the later ritual texts, see Wang Zhiguo, 301-4, and Sun Qingwei, “Shuo Zhou dai ceming li de ‘fan ru jin zhang’ he ‘fan ru jin gui,’” Zhou Qin wenming luncong 1, Shaanxi renmin chubanshe, 2006, 162-6. 165 See for example the Song ding 頌鼎 (2829), translated in Bureaucracy , 105-7. On the participation of two scribes as a King Xuan-era innovation in the appointment ceremony, see Wang Zhiguo, 299-301. 166 On the Yuntang ruins, see Zhouyuan Kaogudui, “Shaanxi Fufeng xian Yuntang, Qizhen Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi 1999-2000 niandu fajue jianbao,” Kaogu 2002.9, 3-26; Xu Lianggao and Wang Wei, “Shaanxi Fufeng Yuntang Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi de chubu renshi,” Kaogu 2002.9, 27-35. Li Feng offers a diagram of the appointment

278

The following discussion will note a few points concerning the appointment ceremony

that are of greatest relevance to the overall evolution of Western Zhou royal ritual.

4.4.1: Physical orientation of ritual participants

Inscriptional records of early Western Zhou rituals, though profoundly concerned with the identities of participants in major ritual events, give little consideration to the physical positions of those participants during the events in question. Among the many inscriptions marking the participation of their commissioners in royal feasts or drinking events, none specify the seating of the commissioner nearer to or farther from the king, for example; nor do the records of royal rong -rites or hui -rites specify the arrangement of the visiting elites during the

ceremonies. The main exception to this rule is the da feng/li rite, in which, as we have seen,

certain high-ranking elites enjoyed the double-edged privilege of following the king during his

progression through the mimetically significant space of the biyong pond. 167 One other early

Western Zhou record, that of the exceptional Xiao Yu ding (2839) inscription, shows traces of concern with the physical orientation of participants in a court ceremony. 168

The focus on physical orientation in appointment inscriptions of King Mu and later date

is thus a significant departure. The degree of detail in the description of physical positions is

unprecedented in earlier materials, with the single and partial exception of the Xiao Yu ding

inscription. 169 Even the most detailed early account of the da feng/li rite offers only the bare-

ceremony superimposed on the Yuntang site in Bureaucracy , p. 108. 167 For the specific inscriptions, see the section on the biyong pond in chapter 3. 168 For a full treatment of this inscription, see the following chapter. It is of note that the related Da Yu ding inscription, a predecessor of sorts of the appointment inscriptions, records no details about the physical orientation of the characters involved in the events it records. In the early Western Zhou inscriptions, such details are for the most part restricted to accounts of the investment of regional states; see Bureaucracy , 105. 169 Unfortunately, lacunae in the Xiao Yu ding inscription obscure some key portions of its account of the physical positions of the participants; see the full translation in chapter 4.

279

bones statement that the king “rode the boat in three directions.” 170 Consistent as it is across the body of appointment inscriptions, this focus suggests a new effort on the part of the royal house, and particularly of King Mu, to control the fine details of physical orientation in court ceremony, or at least to leverage their depiction in the inscriptions of ancestral bronzes as a tool of enculturation. Detailed description of the relative positioning of the body during early Chinese rituals would eventually reach its peak in the Yili , the accounts of which record minute and

repetitive details of participants’ movements. The understanding of such movements as a key

factor in the enculturation of Zhou aristocrats was one of the characteristic innovations of the

thought of Confucius as portrayed in the Analects. 171 The codification and recording of such ritual movements appears for the first time in the appointment inscriptions.

In addition to the detail with which they record physical positions of human bodies, the appointment inscriptions are notable for the stillness of the scene they depict. The main prior case of concern with ritual positions, the da feng/li rite, relied on the movement of the king and his adherents through the space of the biyong pond for its mimetic significance. The sequence of the appointment ceremony instead describes a process whereby participants took up set positions relative to each other, and particularly relative to the Zhou king, whose entry into the hall and taking up of his position marked the beginning of the rite. 172 The creation of a tableau of human

figures is a new phenomenon in the depictions of rituals of the period. 173 It suggests a new focus

of the royal house on the consolidation and maintenance of a particular, fixed image of social

order, combined with a desire to leverage the mimetic efficacy of courtly ceremony to promote

170 Tian Wang gui (4261); see chapter 3. 171 The classic statement of this model is Lunyu , “Wei zheng” 3. “Zi han” 3 offers confirmation that the Confucian formulation of the rites still included physical positioning of participants. See Shisanjing zhushu , 2461, 2489-90. 172 Bureaucracy , 105-11. 173 Both Zhou and Shang elites presumably had experience with the creation of a fixed tableau of human bodies in the context of tomb burials. The late Shang kings in particular employed large numbers of human sacrificial victims; on this phenomenon see Thorp, 186-91. The innovation here is the emphasis on the relative (fixed) positions of living participants, as well as the detailed depiction of those positions in writing.

280

that image and to link it with the material patronage of the Zhou king. 174

4.4.2: The appointment ceremony and changing models of patronage

The appointment ceremony and its associated inscriptions emerged as a large-scale

phenomenon at a moment of unprecedented military vulnerability for the Zhou royal house. 175

The preceding discussion has noted the hybrid use of mieli , a military-tinged patronage ceremony with strong Shang associations, by the royal house during the early portions of the period, as well as the complete lack of royal military mieli during the reign of King Mu. Li Feng has argued that the emergence of the appointment ceremony at this point allowed the substitution of official, bureaucratic appointment for military honors, in the context of the frustration of Zhou ambitions of expansion. 176 Observing that the middle-late Western Zhou kings exercised a relatively free hand in appointing officials, he notes that the Zhou system of formal appointment would have created an environment in which individual achievements, social connections, and personal wealth could all influence the entry of candidates into service. 177 I would note in

addition that, unlike the established mieli ceremony that provided the context for many early

Western Zhou gifts, the appointment ceremony required no specific evidence of past

accomplishment and thus allowed the Zhou kings to weigh the above factors in any combination

when making appointments. Moreover, unlike the ideal of military patronage expressed in the

mieli rite, the bureaucratic appointment of officials was a relatively new phenomenon, and so the

Zhou kings had the opportunity to dominate the ideological message of the associated ritual.

174 For further discussion of the mimetic efficacy of the human tableau as a tool of enculturation, see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, “Ideology, Materialization, and Power Stragegies,” as discussed in the Introduction to this work. 175 See notes 18 and 39; also see Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 33-8. 176 Ibid., 104-5. 177 See ibid., 215-6.

281

Li has noted the division of participants in the appointment ceremony into two “classes,”

placing the king and his representative royal scribes in physical opposition to the youzhe and the appointee. 178 A similar division occurred as well in many royally sponsored archery meets,

which, as noted above, left most of their traces in the inscriptions of King Mu’s reign.

Considered together, these trends suggest an organized effort employing rituals to argue that the

division between the king and his personal subordinates and the remainder of the elite

community was fundamental to Zhou society. The division of these parties in ritual contexts

would have complemented contemporaneous efforts to establish a functional distinction between

the administration of the Zhou royal territory and that of outlying areas. 179

These factors, I would suggest, contributed to the continued performance of the

appointment ceremony and its association with the institutional production of bronze inscriptions

throughout the Western Zhou period, in contrast with the waning of the model of patronage

expressed by the mieli rite.

4.4.3: Written documents, the appointment ceremony, and the production of inscribed bronzes

As portrayed in the standardized appointment inscriptions, a royal scribe or, in some later cases, two royal scribes were necessary participants in the Western Zhou appointment ceremony. 180 Many of the inscriptions record that the king’s command of appointment was written on a bamboo document and recited during the ceremony. The use of these written documents was a usual, if not a necessary, component of the appointment ceremony, such that inscriptions recording it are now generally though not universally known in Chinese as ceming

178 Ibid., 111. 179 On the administrative separation of the area of direct royal control from the Western Zhou state apparatus, see Bureaucracy , 63-70. 180 See Wang Zhiguo, 299-301.

282

mingwen 冊命銘文, or “inscriptions of commands with documents.” 181 Li Feng cites this as

evidence of the spread of elite literacy during the Western Zhou period. 182

Our understanding of the documents used in the Western Zhou appointment ceremony of

course comes not from examples of those documents – no writings so perishable survive from

the Western Zhou period – but from the evidence of their existence in the inscriptions of more

durable ritual bronze vessels commemorating official appointments. 183 In many cases, these documents were given to the appointees after the attending scribes read them, and it has been plausibly suggested that they formed the basis for the commemorative inscriptions on ancestral bronzes commissioned by appointees. 184 Given the large number of appointment inscriptions that survive from the middle and late Western Zhou periods, the provision of written documents representing the words of the king for inclusion in bronze inscriptions must have placed a substantial volume of recorded royal utterances into the ancestral-ritual material assemblages of

Western Zhou officials. Together with the standardization of the process of official appointment, this custom would have created a consistent portrayal, reaching across the boundaries between elite lineage cults, of the Zhou king as the legitimizing force behind the body of officials that conducted the day-to-day operations of the Zhou state. 185

181 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 111-2, which lists several examples of the involvement of scribes and written documents in the appointment ceremony. The question of the necessity of the written document in the appointment ceremony underlies a continuing debate over the use of the term ceming mingwen . Yoshimoto restricts his list of appointment inscriptions to those that contain the term ceming 冊命 itself; see Yoshimoto, 40-2. Li Feng objects to this limitation in Bureaucracy , p. 104, n. 15, noting that it excludes many inscriptions that obviously record official appointment ceremonies conducted according to the same standard. At the other side of the spectrum, objection to this criterion drives He Shuhuan’s use of the term ximing , “conferral of command,” rather than ceming ; see note 152. 182 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 113-4. 183 The simple use of the term ce 冊 in the inscriptions is, I believe, sufficient evidence of the existence of such documents. The precise role of the documents in the appointment ceremony is, however, still a matter of debate; on this see Martin Kern, “The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China,” 152-7. 184 Li Feng, Bureaucracy , 110-1. 185 The promotion of a consistent portrayal of the king in the inscriptions of locally used ritual bronzes was part and parcel of the “distributed personhood” of the Zhou kings, through which they sought to extend their face-to-face interactions with lesser elites into local contexts. On the concept of distributed personhood, see Gell, Art and

283

To achieve maximum ideological effectiveness, this portrayal would have relied on the

performance of ancestral offerings and hospitality events at which interested parties were

exposed to inscribed bronzes. 186 As an earlier chapter has noted, the middle Western Zhou saw

an effort on the part of the Zhou kings to patronize the performance of Shang-style ancestral

rituals, and in particular livestock offerings, among non-royal elites. 187 Such performances would have created opportunities for bronzes inscribed with records of royal appointments to operate on local elites, at once aggrandizing their commissioners and encouraging their associates in conceptions of official position as a route to prestige and of the Zhou king as the font from which that prestige sprang. At the same time, the kings’ effort to encourage Shang- style ancestral offerings and hospitality events among local power-holders had the potential to dull one of their sharpest ideological tools, i.e., the hosting of major ancestral-ritual events, the accompanying distribution of hospitality and largesse, and the leveraging of those occasions of contact in the context of local ancestral cults through the customary casting of inscribed vessels recording them. The standardized appointment ceremony and its recording in bronze inscriptions was a potential counterbalance to this adulteration of royal ancestral ritual. It allowed the Zhou kings to encourage the expansion of offerings such as the di rite among non-

royal lineages, while maintaining a presence in the ideological rhetoric of those offerings and

partaking of the opportunity they provided to promote the image of the king as linchpin of a

Agency , 102-4, 230-51. The “ethic of presence” driving the production and use of bronzes is discussed in Chapter 1. From Latour’s standpoint, the “ethic of presence” was an effort to engage actors such as bronzes, bronze inscriptions, and local cult participants as intermediaries rather than as mediators, representing the royal agenda faithfully and without change; on the distinction, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 37-42. Thanks in part to the degree of distribution of the ancestral cult practices on which the Zhou kings had based their earliest ritual attempts at promoting cohesion, this effort was ultimately unsuccessful, as the conclusion to chapter 2 of this work has shown. The role of bronzes acting as mediators in thwarting this process will be considered further in the conclusion to this work. 186 The category of “interested parties” could potentially include the deceased ancestors of elite lineages as well as living Zhou elites, at least in the conceptions of the living persons taking part in the process. 187 See chapter 2.

284

well-ordered and coherent state.

4.5: Conclusion: evolving strategies of patronage and enrollment

At the time of the conquest, the Zhou kings enjoyed relationships with a variety of adherents connected to them through diverse ties of kinship, customary intermarriage, and shared mixtures of antagonism and loyalty toward the Shang state. Interpersonal interactions are, however, among the weakest forces involved in the formation of groups, requiring reinforcement through heightened and normatively charged modes of expression – that is, with ritual – and solidification through the mediating potential of objects in order to support shared group identities in the long term. 188 Relations of patronage – that is, the maintenance of loyalty through

the official recognition and reward of adherents – were thus as important to the Zhou royal house

as to any would-be state-builders. Early in the period, the Zhou kings adapted a ritual model

inherited from the Shang and embedded in the context of military campaigns for the expression

and perpetuation of these relations. Later, they introduced new ritual expressions of patronage

that together divorced the process from military campaigning, while still perpetuating the model

of the ideal Zhou aristocrat as an accomplished warrior. The result was a shift in the model of

enrollment in the Zhou state project from one of allegiance to a war leader to one of service to a

sovereign with intrinsic rights over the operation of the state. 189 This shift complemented and,

indeed, formed part of a simultaneous effort to distinguish the prerogatives of the royal house

188 On the weakness of face-to-face interactions, and on the roles of objects in perpetuating those interactions, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 63-86. In a sense, Latour is hearkening back to the arguments underlying Mauss’s examination of kula exchange in The Gift (see W.D. Halls, tr., Marcel Mauss, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, London: Routledge, 1990, 8-18); with the caveat that Latour would, I believe, read humans and kula items as playing symmetrical roles in the exchange, with the ultimate goal of forming and re-forming the exchange-group. Constance Cook has applied some of these ideas to the Western Zhou context in her consideration of royal gifts as prestation, Wealth and the Western Zhou . 189 On the concept of “enrollment” ( interessement ), see Callon in Law, 206-11.

285

and powerful non-royal elites in the governmental sphere. 190 The opposition of those two groups

is thus often reflected in the ritual manifestations of patronage in the middle and late Western

Zhou bronze inscriptions.

In the early Western Zhou inscriptions, the main non-devotional rite of prestige

distribution was the expression of military patronage and recognition known as mieli ; this rite

with apparent Shang origins was practiced with some frequency by both the Zhou kings and

lesser elites, though its use in civil contexts seems to have been an innovation of the new royal

house. By the end of the early Western Zhou, this practice had been joined by the royal

sponsorship of archery meets, providing a new ritual context for archery that welcomed the

participation of a wide spectrum of Zhou elites rather than focusing on the king. During the

reign of King Mu, Zhou royal performance of mieli for subordinates slackened, with most cases relating to ritual events rather than military affairs; however, a large group of non-royal military mieli dates to this period. The King Mu era was also the heyday of the hosting of royally sponsored archery, seeing the establishment of infrastructure to support its institutionalized performance. Perhaps most importantly, the reign of King Mu saw the beginning of the frequent recording of a standardized ceremony of official appointment in bronze, a subject that would dominate the inscriptional record for the remainder of the period. Evidently, King Mu’s reign saw a full suite of changes in the approach of the royal house to the use of non-ancestral ritual in distributing prestige and negotiating status.

It has already been noted that King Mu’s reign was a point of military crisis for the royal house. In light of the complete absence of military character in the records of mieli of the period, the set of changes implemented in royal prestige ritual at that time can be seen as an effort to

190 On the administrative separation of the area of direct royal control from the Western Zhou state apparatus, see Bureaucracy , 63-70. Implicit in this division, I believe, is the assumption that non-royal elites will be active in the second realm; otherwise no division would be necessary.

286

shore up the authority of the king in the context of a failing model of military patronage. The

early Western Zhou state had its roots in a military coalition focused on the overthrow of the

Shang; as we have seen in the previous chapters, the ancestral ritual of the early Western Zhou

acted to perpetuate the interpersonal relationships making up that coalition through successive

generations. The frustration of the ongoing project of Zhou expansion, occasioned by the death

of King Zhao in the south and the subsequent retaliatory attacks, must have compromised the

relationships making up the Zhou state on a basic level – not least because the king could not

provide honors and largesse to military adherents, as seen in the lack of military mieli attributed

to King Mu. 191 Non-royal elites could and did, however, as shown by the body of inscriptions associated with the “Old Encampment.” The absence of the royal house from military patronage activities created a hole that could potentially be filled by non-royal Zhou elites engaging in the same patronage practices that supported the formation of the state. The development of a new, dedicated model of the ritual instantiation of royal patronage helped to stem this potential crisis of royal authority.

The measures taken to systematize official appointment rituals and to intensify ceremonial archery during King Mu’s reign created new contexts for royal sponsorship, providing opportunities for the king to win and reward adherents and for elites to distinguish themselves outside existing relationships of military patronage. The subsequent creation of bronzes recording the king’s formulaic speeches in direct address created a consistent portrayal of the king as administrative center of the state in the context of local ancestral cults. This portrayal would of course have relied on the hosting of hospitality events and performance of ancestral offerings at the local level for its conveyance, and it is perhaps not coincidental that the middle Western Zhou also saw royal efforts at material support of Shang-style livestock

191 See notes 18 and 39.

287 offerings among powerful local elites. The capacity for “distributing presence” already inherent in the institutionalized production of inscribed bronzes provided the Zhou kings with the tools to disseminate a new model of the relationship between the king, his adherents, and the world in general. The conclusion to this work will relate these changes to the movement of the Zhou royal strategy away from the use of ancestral rites as intermediaries in the performance of Zhou group identity. In doing so, it will propose a combined ritual and political explanation for the vaunted “ritual reform” or “ritual revolution.”

288

CHAPTER 5 WESTERN ZHOU RITUAL: A SEQUENTIAL AND REINTEGRATIVE ANALYSIS

5.1: Introduction

The previous chapters of this work have considered the organizational and material underpinnings of Western Zhou ritual; the introduction, spread, and eventual co-opting of specific Shang-style ancestral rites among Zhou-affiliate elites; the ritual figuration of the king and his relationship to the state, and the changes in that figuration over time; and the evolution of ritual instantiations of patronage over the course of the period. These analyses have focused on individual phenomena such as zong temples, kinship terms, the di and hui rites, the “Great Rite,” royal archery meets, and the like. While that approach has allowed us to observe patterns in the approaches of both kings and non-royal elites to ritual over the course of the period, it does not reflect the manner in which Western Zhou kings actually deployed ritual techniques. In practice, individual ritual techniques were not employed in a vacuum, but in combination with each other and in conjunction with the overall political strategies of the royal house. This final chapter thus offers a comprehensive, chronologically organized review and analysis of the royal ritual of the

Western Zhou period as described in the bronze inscriptions. It will show that Western Zhou royal ritual evolved in close complement to the geopolitical situation of the Zhou state.

The early Zhou kings, the chapter will argue, drew on their expertise with ritual techniques of Shang provenance to create multivalent ancestral-ritual event assemblies encouraging enrollment in the Zhou elite group identity and state project. The narratives of these assemblies relied on a conception of the king as military coalition leader and member of an ancestral patriline, above but essentially similar to the other elites making up the state; this complemented the Zhou royal strategy of expansion through the delegation of near-absolute authority to local

289

representatives. 1 A transition to a different focus of state ritual, in which royal ancestral

offerings played less of a role, began during the reign of King Zhao and continued under King

Mu. The latter reign, however, saw the revival of some older techniques, as the royal house

struggled to retain its relevance after King Zhao’s untimely death and the stymieing of Zhou

expansion. This combination of old and new techniques, including in particular the introduction

of the official appointment ritual, made the reign of King Mu the peak of diversity in Western

Zhou royal ritual.

After King Mu, the royal house abandoned the public performance of most of the rites it

used during the early Western Zhou, focusing on newer techniques that naturalized royal

authority, intensified royal control over resource production and political appointment, and

created new contexts for competition and differentiation among Zhou elites. This shift in focus

was chronologically close to the changes in bronze vessel types, decoration, and assemblages

sometimes called the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform,” which similarly allowed increased

differentiation and naturalization of existing models of status in the context of lineage ritual. The

two sets of changes, the chapter will suggest, were facets of the same royal program of change in

the implementation of ritual as a tool for the maintenance of the Zhou collective.

Though royal ancestral ritual disappeared from the inscriptions, ancestral offerings remained

a matter of concern for elites at all levels of Zhou society. The appearance of a new vocabulary

of non-royal ancestral offerings in the late Western Zhou suggests a divergence in royal and non-

royal conceptions of Zhou elite identity. That divergence set the tone for later characterizations

of Western Zhou ritual. Its timing in the late Western Zhou, the chapter will argue, suggests a

continued degree of royal engagement in the ritual customs of individual lineages throughout the

middle Western Zhou period, in keeping with the “top-down” model of the “ritual reform.”

1 On the authority of Western Zhou regional rulers, see Bureaucracy , 245-8.

290

5.2: Ancestors and the ethic of presence: early Western Zhou ritual

In the early years of the Western Zhou period, the Zhou reached out from their homeland in Shaanxi, swept the Shang kings aside, and extended their influence across most of what is now

North China. Early texts tell us that they did so at the head of a coalition of western populations unhappy with the immoral and tyrannical rule of the last Shang king. 2 If we accept that model,

the question remains: Why did the Zhou kings and their adherents, rather than some other

interest group, emerge at the forefront of this coalition, and how did they stay there? The

deployment of ritual techniques by the Zhou royal house was a key element of this equation.

That later generations recalled the emphasis of the royal house on ritual is clear from the Zhou

characterization of the failure of the Shang project in the “Zhou ben ji,” which attributed the fall

of Shang at least in part to the breakdown of its system of ritual offerings. 3

We have seen that the early Zhou kings had a high degree of access to Shang ritual techniques, including ancestral offerings, exorcisms, and written records of pyromantic divination, even before the Shang conquest. 4 The Zhou royal line used this ritual expertise as a

primary tool of legitimization from the earliest stages of its ascendancy. By providing an

alternative to the direct military domination of subject populations, and by magnifying the

rhetorical effect of specific military interventions, 5 this tradition of ritual allowed the kings to minimize the commitment of military resources necessary to maintain the newly formed Zhou

2 Shangshu, “Mu shi,” Shisanjing zhushu , 182-3; Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 121-5. 3 Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 125-6. 4 See in particular the discussion of the Zhouyuan oracle bones in chapter 2. Perhaps most tellingly, though several bronze-using cultures engaged in relations with the Shang, the Zhou are the only one of those populations that developed a tradition of pyromantic divination with inscribed records. 5 The ritual event recorded in the Xiao Yu ding , which included the execution of prisoners from among the Guifang 鬼方 as a coercive element of the narrative, provides an example of this.

291

collective. 6 The kings thus consistently accompanied governmental and infrastructural changes – the delegation of authority to regional rulers, the establishment of the eastern capital Chengzhou, the consolidation of official appointments in the middle Western Zhou – with ritual materializations of ideological arguments.

In the early-middle Western Zhou period, the Zhou royal house sought to perpetuate the links between its adherents through the shared experience of patrilineal ancestral worship.

Specifically, Zhou ritual encouraged participants to define themselves as members of patrilines, and the royal house argued for a definition of lineages based on their connections to the royal house through “nexus ancestors.” In effect, according to this model, any individual lineage was

“born” at the moment of its nexus ancestor’s forging of a bond of cooperation with the royal house, typically, but not always, during the reigns of Kings Wen and Wu. To follow the Zhou king on campaign was depicted as the “reaggregative” moment for a lineage, marking its entry into the “reconstituted order” of the Zhou cultural identity. This moment of rejoining was referred to in royal announcements such as that of the He zun inscription and made immediate by the Great Rite, allowing Zhou adherents to experience it anew. 7

It has been noted that Zhou ancestral ritual focuses on near ancestors to a much greater extent

than that of the Shang. 8 This might have happened because the model of patrilineal kinship was comparatively new to the Zhou and/or some of their adherents; certainly, as seen in the bronze inscriptions, kinship group identity expanded greatly over the course of the Western Zhou period.

6 On the role of ritual in creating power by soliciting participation, see Bell’s discussion of Foucault in Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, 199-201. 7 On the concept of “reaggregation” as the destination of the liminal phase in rites of passage, see Victor W. Turner, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure, Chicago: Aldine, 1969, 94-130, esp. 94-5; for the phrase “reconstituted order,” see the discussion of Turner in Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, 40. The suggestion here is that the Zhou royal house approached the reigns of the late Shang kings and the conquest itself as a “liminal period” (see Turner, 94) in which the social order formerly known under the Shang was dismantled and had to be rebuilt. I will explore this idea further in future work. 8 Liu Yu, “Jinwen zhong,” 515.

292

The differential deployment of specific Shang-style offerings in conjunction with the

establishment of Chengzhou, however, suggests that the early Zhou kings took a nuanced view

of the role of ritual in managing interactions with elites of former Shang affiliation. It is likely

that the royal house intentionally promoted a more recently focused model of ritual, with the

“nexus ancestors” as terminus ante quem , in order to deemphasize previous ties to the Shang

royal house or local power holders in favor of a model in which prestige and status derived

ultimately from connections with the Zhou kings.

The expanded use of inscribed bronze vessels during the Western Zhou period supported this

model. 9 Rather than duplicating canonical texts or accounts of events of shared historical significance, the inscriptions of Western Zhou bronzes (like those of Shang bronzes before them) typically record specific moments of contact between powerful patrons – most often the Zhou king – and beneficiaries. The customary use of inscribed bronzes in Western Zhou ritual thus allowed the Zhou kings to pursue a complementary strategy of “distributed personhood,” 10

wherein bronzes served as constant indices of the presence of the Zhou kings. 11 The increased

level of detail of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions allowed the narratives of royal ritual events

to play a role in the ancestral cult activities of geographically distant lineages, exerting royal

influence on elites who might otherwise have little or no contact with the king.

5.2.1: Separating from Shang: The formation of Zhou ritual in the period of expansion

9 On the comparative paucity of long inscriptions dating to the Shang, see Keightley, “Shang History,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China , 235, n. 9. 10 On “distributed personhood,” see Gell, Art and Agency , 102-4, 228-32. 11 On the index as a variety of sign, see Charles Sanders Peirce, Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 2: Elements of Logic, Cambridge: Belknap, 1960, chapter 2, no. 248, 143. On the indexing of presence, see Gell’s discussion of kula exchange in Art and Agency , 230-2.

293

The early Zhou kings built major, multivalent ancestral-ritual events around a broad

range of ritual techniques derived from the Shang. In particular, the hui-entreaty ȼ ; the

livestock offering known as di/chi 禘/啻; the rong -offering ; the burning of captured ears known as liao 燎; the rite known as su 餗, possibly a grain offering; the yue -rite 禴; the zheng - offering 烝, probably involving the presentation of liquor; and the zhu -invocation 祝 all made up part of the ritual toolkit of the early Western Zhou kings. Events centered on these techniques brought elites from across the sphere of Zhou expansion together at the royal centers of

Zongzhou, Pangjing, and Chengzhou. Combining offerings to the royal ancestors with the provision of hospitality, the granting of material rewards, and, often, with the ceremony of official recognition known as mieli , they created opportunities for interaction between the king and power-holders to whom the royal house had delegated responsibility over portions of the newly claimed Zhou territory; these included lesser scions of the Zhou royal house, local chiefs whose polities had been integrated into the Zhou state model, and influential elites of former

Shang affiliation. 12 Participation in these events brought lesser elites into contact with the preeminent figures in the new Zhou government, including the king himself; the receipt of material rewards encouraged them to conceive of the patrilineal-ancestral model, and the Shang- style offerings that supported it, as a vehicle to status and wealth, with the Zhou king as preeminent performer of such rites. The forging of this association was a key facet of the enrollment of non-royal elites in the royal vision of Zhou elite identity.

12 The states of Lu, granted to the descendants of the Duke of Zhou (himself a brother of King Wu), and Jin, granted to Tangshu Yu, are classic examples of the first type.; for inscriptional evidence of the latter grant, see the Ke lei (JL: 987). The state of Yu 虞, near present day Baoji, was likely an example of the second type; see Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng, Baoji Yu guo mudi , Beijing: Wenwu, 1988; Landscape and Power , 183. The state of Song is the classic example of the third type; see Shiji , “Song Weizi shijia,” 1607-35. The Daqinggong site in Henan is likely the burial site of Weizi; on this see Wang Entian, “Luyi Daqinggong Xi Zhou da mu yu Weizi feng Song,” Zhongyuan wenwu 2002.4, 41-5; Landscape and Power , 75-6. For the site report, see Henan sheng wenwu kaogu yanjiusuo and Zhoukou shi wenhuaju, Luyi Daqinggong Changzi Kou Mu , Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou guji, 2000.

294

Though most of the above ritual techniques were of Shang provenance, the Zhou royal

implementation thereof did not adhere completely to Shang precedent. Certain of these

techniques – di/chi and liao in particular – saw more specialized use under the Zhou than the

Shang; the former was applied only to recently deceased ancestors, the latter only to the burning of ears taken from captives. 13 The application of the mieli ceremony of recognition in non- military contexts seems also to have been an innovation of the Zhou kings. Perhaps the greatest addition to the early Western Zhou ritual repertoire, however, was the “Great Rite” ( da feng/li 大

豐/禮) performed on the biyong pond by several early Western Zhou kings. Though royal shooting on bodies of water was known under the Shang, the Great Rite of the Zhou clarified and intensified its ideological effect with the specification of controlled movements around the cosmologically charged space of the biyong pond. Together with the continued use of mieli in

military contexts and the presentation of ears to the ancestors, the Great Rite figured the Zhou

king as the leader of a military coalition. These departures from Shang precedent suited the

political and military environment of the early Western Zhou, which saw the rapid expansion of

the Zhou across and beyond the former Shang territories, the integration of allied populations

and Shang survivors into the Zhou coalition, and the suppression of outlying, non-participating

peoples such as the Guifang. 14

Shang-style rituals were not limited to the Zhou kings. Records of non-royal hui -entreaty, of

the mieli recognition ceremony, and, in particular, of the negative entreaty known as yu 禦 all

13 Shang di targeted both ancestors and natural spirits, while Zhou di was only for recent ancestors; on this point see chapter 2, note 29. Likewise, the Shang initially performed liao toward a vast range of entities, though its range of targets shrank over the course of the period, while the Zhou used it only in military contexts; see chapter 2, note 64, and the discussion of liao in general. 14 For details on the relationship between the Zhou and the Guifang, see the inscription of the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839).

295

survive from the early Western Zhou. 15 Non-royal performances of the former two rites occur

with some frequency throughout the early, middle, and, in the case of hui -entreaty, the late

Western Zhou, suggesting that they achieved good penetration among the Western Zhou elite community in general. Judging from the funereal names of ancestors, the records of mieli and yu carried out by non-royal elites of the early Western Zhou show strong Shang associations. Their appearance in bronze inscriptions of that period likely reflects the significant role played by parties of former Shang affiliation in the formation of Western Zhou elite society.

5.2.2: Early Western Zhou ritual assemblies: the example of the Mai fangzun

As the inscriptions translated throughout this work have shown, royal ceremonies combined ancestral offerings, rites of figuration, and ritual expressions of patronage, along with the provision of hospitality and nourishment, into ritual event assemblies, the traces of which made their way into the activities of non-royal lineages through the medium of inscribed bronzes. This tendency was particularly strong during the early Western Zhou, when the Zhou kings still employed a broader range of individual ancestral offerings than would later be the case.

By far the clearest manifestation of the operation of a royal ritual event at multiple levels of the Zhou hierarchy is the narrative of the Mai fangzun 麥方尊 (6015). 16 We have delved into this inscription already as a record of a case of the “Great Rite.” The later events in the sequence, however – those relating to the vessel commissioner Mai – offer a vision of the extension of the effect of that most centralizing of rites into a local context. A case study of that inscription will

15 As discussed in chapter 2, the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu suggests that the early Zhou kings may also have performed the yu rite at least once; however, its negative nature did not lend itself to incorporation into the integrative ritual narratives pursued by the Zhou royal house. 16 The Mai fangzun is generally dated to the reign of King Cheng or King Kang, along with other bronzes connected with Mai; see MWX, 46; Shirakawa 11.60, 645-6; Bureaucracy , 261, n. 58. For more details on the Mai fangzun , see the discussion of the Great Rite in chapter 3.

296

show that the event it recorded combined techniques crossing the spectra of present and absent,

living and dead, royal and non-royal, formal and casual, into a ritual event assembly, creating a

compressed narrative of enrollment in the Zhou collective. 17 As major political and cultural events, royal rituals like those conducted at the Mai fangzun event involved the upper echelons

of Zhou elite society; but, as the discussion will reveal, the “ethic of presence” associated with

the creation of inscribed bronzes allowed them to extend ritual materializations of royal ideology

through successive ranks and lineages. In making these points, the following discussion will

seek finally to paint a convincing actor-network portrait of early Western Zhou rites as efforts to

resolve controversies about the formation and re-formation of the Zhou group identity. 18 The full inscription appears below:

王令辟井（邢）侯出坏，侯于井（邢），若二月，侯見于宗周，亡（尤）， （會）王京，祀。若 （翌），才（在）璧（辟）雝（雍），王乘于舟，為大豐19 （禮），王射大禽，侯乘于赤旂舟，從，死咸。之日，王（以）侯內（入）于寢，侯易（賜）玄周（琱）戈。王才（在），巳（己）夕，侯易（賜）者（赭）臣二百家，劑（齎）用王乘車馬、金勒、冂衣、巿、舄，唯歸，（揚）天子休，告亡尤，用（恭）義（儀）寧侯，考于井（邢）侯。乍（作）冊麥易（賜）金于辟侯，麥揚，用乍（作）寶彝，用侯逆（授）， （揚）明令，唯天子休于麥辟侯之年鑄，孫孫子子其永亡冬（終），冬（終）用（造）德，妥（綏）多友，（享）旋走令。 The king commanded the sovereign Marquis of Xing to come out from Huai and take up the Marquisate of Xing. Around the second month, the Marquis presented himself at Zongzhou; there were no problems. He met the king for a wan/xiang feast at the Pang

17 On the “collective” as an assembly of previously ungathered entities, see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 75; on the need for its composition to include both humans and non-humans, see p. 164. On the figuration of agencies, see pp. 53-4. I am proposing here that the concept of Zhou 周 as a coherent entity was itself a figuration in this sense. With the term “ritual assemblies” I intend the idea that the combination of individual ritual techniques and registers of communication under the rubric of a single event was itself the assembly of a separate collective, one that operated both directly and mimetically to complement the assembly of the collective that was Zhou. On the assembly of collectives, see pp. 16-7; on the operation of ritual tableaus through the mimetic rule of similarity, see the discussion of Gell in the Introduction. 18 On the deployment of controversies in pursuit of actor-network analysis, see ibid., 21-5. 19 The AS database transcribes this character as 豊; however, as fig. 3.2 shows, it is clearly a case of feng 豐. I have altered the above transcription accordingly.

297

Capital; a rong offering was conducted. The next day, at the biyong pond, the king rode in a boat and conducted a great feng/li rite. The king shot large birds, and the Marquis followed in a boat with a red flag; all (the birds?) were killed. That day, the king brought the Marquis into his chambers. The Marquis was presented with a dark, patterned ge - blade. When the king was at An, in the evening, the Marquis was presented with two hundred households worth of red-footed servants; 20 he also received the privilege of riding in the royal chariot-and-horse, 21 a metal bridle, a hat, 22 a garment, a kneepad, 23 and shoes. When he returned, he praised the beneficence of the Son of Heaven and reported that (the trip) went without incident. He thereby conducted a respectful ceremony for Marquis Ning (the Peaceful Marquis), and had an audience with (?) his deceased father as the Marquis of Xing. 24 Document Maker Mai received a gift of metal from the sovereign; Mai praises (him) and thereby makes a precious and revered vessel, with which to receive 25 the Marquis, to welcome the conferral [of rewards], 26 and to praise the brilliant command. It was cast in the year in which the Son of Heaven showed beneficence to Mai’s sovereign the Marquis; [may Mai’s] descendants endure without end and long use [it] to receive 27 virtue, mollify their many colleagues, and contribute their diligent efforts to the mandate. 28

Laying out the sequence of events recorded and/or implied in the inscription will allow us to

consider certain points.

1. Summoning: At some unspecified point, the Zhou king issued a command installing the

Marquis of Xing as such.

20 Following Ma Chengyuan’s reading of as huai 踝, “ankle, foot.” Ma suggests that these were criminals; see MWX , 47, n. 13. The use of the measure word jia 家, “households,” seems to me to mitigate against this reading; my sense is that criminals would more likely be measured as individuals rather than household units. 21 The rendering follows Bureaucracy , 261, in taking this clause to refer to the privilege of using the royal chariot rather than to the chariot itself; for a contrasting opinion, see MWX , 47, n. 14. 22 Following Ma’s reading of 冂 as mian 冕; seeibid. 23 Again following Ma’s reading; see ibid. 24 The syntax of this clause is unusual. My sense is that the Marquis is greeting his deceased father for the first time as the recognized Marquis of Xing. MWX , on the other hand, reads it as meaning that Document Maker Mai “respectfully and majestically set the Marquis [of Xing] at ease”; see MWX , 47, n. 17. Li Feng follows this reading as well in Bureaucracy , 262. 25 See MWX , 48, notes 20 and 1, for a gloss of  as zhi 至, “to arrive.” The sense here is that the vessel was to be used in entertaining the Marquis during visits to Mai’s residence. 26 Here I follow Li Feng in reading ni shou 逆as “to welcome the conferral,” taking as shou 受 or 授 rather than as zao 造; see Bureaucracy , 15, for examples from other bronzes. MWX explains this reading on 48, n. 20. I have changed the transcription accordingly. 27 See previous note. 28 I follow MWX in reading the phrase rendered in the AS database as xuan zou 旋走 as ben zou 奔走, “to hurry about [in pursuit of a task]”; see MWX , 48, n. 25.

298

2. Appointment : In the second month after his appointment, the Marquis of Xing traveled

to Zongzhou, the center of Zhou government. 29 Probably, this trip involved some form of

formal registration or recognition of his new office. The Marquis’s visit to Zongzhou

may well have involved an entirely separate ritual event; 30 the Mai fangzun does not

narrate the process.

3. Feasting and royal ancestral offerings: After conducting his business at Zongzhou, the

Marquis traveled to the nearby secondary capital of Pangjing, where he took part in a

feast that the king hosted. 31 A rong -rite, an ancestral offering derived from the Shang,

was conducted during or shortly after this feast; this would have targeted the king’s

ancestors. Though no other figures are mentioned, we may assume that the feast and by

extension the rite were public events bringing together several Zhou elites under the

rubric of royal hospitality.

4. The “Great Rite”: The sequence of the “Great Rite” itself and its implications have

already been discussed in chapter 3.

5. A private audience: After the Great Rite was completed, the king took the Marquis into

his personal chambers and there gave him a valuable, decorated weapon. 32 Given the

venue, and since the weapon was the only item that the king gave at that time, this would

seem to have been a personal gesture rather than a public conferral of official

accoutrements.

29 On the question of the identity of Zongzhou with the capital Feng/Hao, see the summary in see Maria Khayutina, T’oung Pao 96 (2010), 6, n. 13. For the reading that the Marquis arrived at Zongzhou two months after receiving the king’s command, see Shirakawa 11.60, 631, 644; Landscape and Power , 114. 30 The Yihou Ze gui 宜侯夨簋 (4320) records an example of the investiture of a personage as hou 侯, “Marquis”; for a translation, see Bureaucracy , 238-41. Due to the paucity of examples, it is unclear as of yet whether the process recorded therein has any standardized elements that might be called “ritual.” 31 On Pangjing, see Bureaucracy , 152-3; Khayutina, 6-7, n. 15. 32 For the reading of the character as qin 寢, see Shirakawa 11.60, 637. Shirakawa suggests that the term here was equivalent to the Great Hall ( Taishi 太室); for the reading of qin 寢 as “bedchamber,” see Bureaucracy , 262.

299

6. Public reward and outfitting: The king’s personal gesture was followed by a separate,

formal bequest at a location called An. 33 There the Marquis of Xing received a full

courtly outfit and a very large number of “red-footed servants” as gifts; further, he was

awarded the privilege of riding in the king’s carriage. The provision of these gifts and

distinctions marked the Marquis as a participant in the highest level of Zhou elite

culture. 34

7. Return and reporting: Upon returning to his home base, 35 the Marquis presented

himself to his deceased father in his new role as the Marquis of Xing and reported ( gao

告) that his visit to the center of Zhou royal power went well.. 36 Like many bronzes, the

Mai fangzun records that its commissioner “praised the beneficence of the Son of Heaven”

(yang tianzi xiu 揚天子休). 37 This inscription specifies that this praise occurred after the

commissioner of the vessel returned home from his audience with the king; most are

ambiguous on this point.

8. Reward of subordinate: The Marquis gave metal to Mai, a subordinate who carried the

title of Document Maker ( Zuoce 作冊). No specifics are given on the nature of Mai’s

service to the Marquis. 38 It is possible that Mai was rewarded simply for being present at

the gao -announcement. Since Mai’s title suggests that he was responsible for producing

33 This may well be the same location that later hosted the foal-catching rite recorded in the inscription of the Li juzun, as suggested in MWX, 47, n. 11. I do not, however, follow Ma in considering the term to refer to the banks of the biyong pond. Since the gifts the Marquis received included a chariot and horse, it is possible that the location called An was already associated with equestrian activities by the time of the Mai fangzun events. 34 See Bureaucracy , 262-3. 35 The inscription does not inform us whether this referred to the Marquis’s prior home at Huai or to a new residence associated with his appointment over Xing, located in present-day Hebei; see Landscape and Power , 28. 36 On the phenomenon of the gao-report, an important link in the chain between royal and local rituals, see chapter 1. 37 See for example the inscriptions of the Li juzun (6011) and the Zuoce Wu he , both translated in chapter 3. 38 Again, the differences in Li Feng’s reading of the inscription yield a slightly more detailed account of Mai’s involvement; see Bureaucracy , 262. Even that reading, however, describes the quality rather than the concrete details of Mai’s service.

300

written documents, however, it is likely that his reward was meant as compensation for

producing an account of the trip used in the Marquis’s report to his ancestors.

9. Commissioning of the vessel: The reward that Mai received allowed him to produce the

Mai fangzun . Here and in the following dedication, Mai specified a number of uses for

the vessel. It would assist Mai in hosting the Marquis; “praise the command/mandate”; 39

support the career efforts of Mai’s descendants; help them keep up relations with

acquaintances; and, perhaps most importantly, it would allow them to “receive virtue” –

that is, to inherit and carry on the virtuous potency of their ancestors, among whom Mai

would then number. 40 The vessel was thus clearly intended for use in Mai’s ancestral cult.

We may therefore add to the sequence of events:

10. Use of the vessel for hosting visitors and associates and for making offerings to the

commissioner’s ancestors

5.2.3: Early Western Zhou royal ritual and political strategies

During the early Western Zhou period, the Zhou royal house pursued an integrative rather

than an exclusive strategy of ritual. Royal ritual events combined hospitality provision, ancestral

offerings, and individual rewards into narrative sequences depicting the consolidation of the

Zhou state project and the incorporation of non-royal power-holders into that project. Some

39 The term “praise” here is yang 揚, the same term customarily used in response to royal favor, as under heading 7 above. The “command” or “mandate” in question ( ming/ling 命/令; these characters are not distinguished in the bronze script) is ambiguous. Theoretically, it could refer to the “Mandate” in its sense as the Zhou state project (on the dating of which the Western Zhou inscriptions see Martin Kern, “Bronze Inscriptions, the Shijing , and the Shangshu : The Evolution of the Ancestral Sacrifice during the Western Zhou,” in John Lagerwey and Marc Kalinowski, eds., Early Chinese Religion, Part 1: Shang through Han , [1250 B.C.-220 A.D.] , Brill, 2009, 143- 200, esp. 148). My sense, however, is that, both here and in the vessel dedication, the term refers to the personal duties of Mai in the service of the Marquis (and, in the latter case, those of his descendants). 40 On the concept of de during the Western Zhou period, see Vassili Khryukov, “Symbols of Power and Communication in Pre-Confucian China (On the Anthropology of De): Preliminary Assumptions,” BSOAS , vol. 58, no. 2 (1995), 314-33.

301

effort was made, through the performance of the Great Rite at events like that recorded on the

Mai fangzun , at the ritual distinction of the Zhou king from other elites; but even that figured the king as war leader rather than theocrat. Overall, the approach of the early Zhou kings to ritual aimed more to tie disparate groups together with the shared institution of lineage ritual than to distinguish the royal family as qualitatively different from other aristocrats.

This vision of early Zhou royal ritual is in contrast with the character of late Shang ritual as depicted in the oracle bone inscriptions, wherein the Shang kings were the main, if not the only, performers of state-sponsored divination, and eligibility to take part in royal feasts was a fixed status rather than a point of contention. 41 The late Shang state model appears to have relied

on regular royal travel, providing direct contact between the king and distant power-holders, as a

means of maintaining the coherence of Shang affiliation through time. 42 Late Shang ritual

intensified the effect of those brief contacts by naturalizing and obscuring the origins of royal

authority. 43 By the time of the conquest, the geographic range of activity of the Shang kings had decreased considerably, as had the number of other populations and leaders with whom they conducted joint operations. 44 The Shang state was undergoing a process of contraction and consolidation, and the ritual of the late Shang kings correspondingly tended to emphasize the might of the king and to systematize ritual communications. 45 These changes supported the

intensification of royal control while reducing the potential of rites as mediators of various types

of interpersonal ties.

The strategies manifest in the grand ritual event assemblies of the early Zhou kings, on

41 On the king as the main religious specialist in the late Shang oracle bones, see Keightley, “Shang History,” 261-2, 289; on the lack of divination about feast attendees in later oracle bones, see 260. 42 Ibid., 288-9. 43 On this concept see Nora Scott, tr., Maurice Godelier, The Enigma of the Gift , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999, 171-5. 44 Keightley, “Shang History,” 288-9. 45 See Keightley, “Shang History,” 237-45, 272-7, 288-9.

302

the other hand, supported the Zhou state as a recently composed coalition of varied

populations. 46 Reinforcing the ties between these populations, so as to maintain the coherence of the coalition and accommodate a project of rapid geographic expansion, was a primary concern of the Zhou kings during the early part of the period. Event assemblies like those recorded in the

Mai fangzun and Xiao Yu ding inscriptions incorporated depictions of Zhou military might into compressed narrative sequences depicting different ways of relating to the Zhou state project.

These ritual narratives leveraged individual cases of recognition and patronage to encourage the continued enrollment of subordinate rulers in the Zhou collective. 47

Tradition holds that the Zhou “was based on the rites of the Shang.” 48 The Zhou kings acquired an enormous amount of individual ritual techniques, along with both the conceptual and material bases of patrilineal-ancestral ritual, from the Shang; their relative familiarity with these techniques was probably a primary factor in their rise to prominence. However, the overall character of their implementation of those techniques, as gauged by their combination of the

“social objects” of ritual into event assemblies, was quite different from that of the late Shang kings. Important differences between Shang and Zhou ritual were thus in place from the very start of the Western Zhou period.

It is tempting to claim that the different political strategies of the late Shang and the early

Zhou kings led them to approach ritual differently. To do so, however, is to fall prey to the sort of reversal of causality that Latour warns against, wherein the separate existence of the “body politic” is said to drive the production and manifestation of associations on the micro-level. The political and ritual strategies of the Zhou kings were one and the same, composed from and

46 See note 2. 47 On the notion of enrollment, see the discussion of Callon in the introduction. 48 Lunyu, “Wei zheng” 23, Shisanjing zhushu, 2463. For an early consideration of the inscriptional evidence on this point, see Chen Mengjia, “Guwenzi zhong de Shang Zhou jisi,” 149-51.

303

linked through the same elements: inscribed bronzes, campaign spoils, the fruits of the harvest,

ceremonial rewards, patrilineal ancestors. Like military campaigns and material patronage, ritual

action was a primary mediator in the assembly and ongoing re-assembly of the Zhou collective;

the strategies of its employment cannot be separated from those driving the creation and

maintenance of the Zhou state.

5.2.3.1: Lineage and the state in early Western Zhou ritual

The combined complex of royal ritual event assemblies, the creation of inscribed bronzes,

and the shared custom of patrilineal-ancestral ritual complemented the royal political strategy of

the early Western Zhou, when the kings strove to spread Zhou out across a vast geographic area

(fu you si fang 敷有四方)49 by delegating authority over conquered or subdued areas to other lineages sharing greater or lesser kinship ties with the royal house. Elites traveling to the capital for occasions like the Mai fangzun event received royal hospitality and witnessed the ancestral rituals of the royal house, including ritual techniques such as the hui -entreaty, the rong -offering, and the di/chi rite. They received acknowledgements and rewards at these events, whether in association with a specific appointment, like the Marquis of Xing, or through the established patronage model of the mieli recognition ceremony. These elites then conducted similar ceremonies in their home territories, passing both material and intangible benefits on to subordinates and reporting their interactions with the royal house to ancestors. This promulgated certain basic assumptions of patrilineal ancestral ritual about society: that lineage identity was the most significant element of personal identity; that the prestige of a lineage was the result of

49 For a contemporary example of the use of this phrase, see the inscription of the Da Yu ding 大盂鼎 (2837).

304

its association with the Zhou royal house; 50 that the prestige an individual derived from service

to the king was a reiteration of the relationship between the royal house and the lineage; and that

an individual’s activities on behalf of the king were therefore of intrinsic interest, and ultimately

a source of status, in the context of the ancestral cult.

Inscribed bronzes typically recorded instances of immediate contact with the king (or,

occasionally, with other major power-holders). Their use in local ancestral rituals therefore

anchored the ties created and maintained by those rituals to the network of relations between

lineage units and the Zhou royal house. This was possible because royal and non-royal ritual

shared a style, in Gell’s terms. 51 Rather than striving for a monopoly of ritual prestige, as was apparently the case for the late Shang kings, the Zhou royal house leveraged the shared rubric of ancestral-ritual practices and the “ethic of presence” common to bronze inscriptions to distribute the royal presence and materializations of royal ideology across great distances. The utility of bronze inscriptions for this purpose may explain why the Western Zhou was the heyday of the inscribed bronze, while the royal production of inscribed oracle bones, tied closely to the activities of the king, fell by the wayside .52

5.2.3.2: Persuasive royal strategies of group formation

Despite the diversity of ritual techniques and communicative registers assembled in the

event performed at Pangjing and recorded on the Mai fangzun , the overall strategy was one of

persuasion. Provision of hospitality, demonstration of the efficacy of ancestral ritual, and the

50 The inscription of the Shi Qiang pan 史牆盤 is the most direct expression of this assumption from the period. For an English translation and analysis of its inscription, see Sources , 183-92. 51 On Gell’s concept of style and its relationship to “culture,” see Art and Agency , 155-220. 52 Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 297, n. 12, notes that, while pyromantic remains are widespread at Western Zhou sites, shell and bone fragments bearing inscriptions are restricted mainly to early remains in the Zhou heartland.

305

granting of both private and public rewards all sought to incentivize attendees to participate in

the royal vision of the Zhou collective, with the king as coalition leader and paragon lineage

head. The coercive implications of the Great Rite have been discussed in chapter 3; however,

even that rite relied on the participation of the Marquis in building its message. The balance of

the multi-day event was weighted towards positive appeals and depictions of the benefits of

participation in the Zhou state.

The Zhou king combined an impressive variety of ritual techniques and communicative

registers into the Pangjing event. The first stage, a combined feasting event ( wan/xiang ) and ancestral offering ( rong ), presented the king as provider of hospitality and paragon lineage head.

The second stage executed the Great Rite as a mimetic mechanism for figuring the king as military protector of the Zhou territory. Audience with the king in his private chambers provided a more casual context for contact between the king and a single subordinate; by contrast, the conferral of accoutrements of authority at An was a more formal portrayal of the king as patron.

This constant shifting engaged the full spectrum of ritual approaches available to the Zhou king, allowing the Mai fangzun event assemblage to promote a nuanced vision of the Zhou group identity and the king’s place in it. 53

Likewise, the sequence of events through which the king led the new Marquis of Xing focused a progressively greater degree of attention on the Marquis and positioned him in varying ways with respect to both other elites and the king. The first night’s activities situated the

Marquis as a member of a common peer group of elites sharing the experience of royal

53 Tambiah discusses the phenomenon of variance of “verbal forms” within a single ritual sequence in Culture, Thought, and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective , Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1985, 17-54, esp. 17-22. Here, the variance in “communicative registers” extends to the material circumstances of individual actions making up the ritual assembly, e.g., the conferral of a private reward in the king’s chambers as contrasted with the public conferral of the accoutrements of leadership.

306

hospitality, with the king and his ancestors as the focus point. 54 The Great Rite of the following day was still focused on the king, but included the Marquis in a conspicuous supporting role; it marked the Marquis as a privileged if still subordinate associate of the king, partaking in the king’s mimetically instantiated capacity to wage war at any point throughout the Zhou territory.

This would have encouraged both the observers and the Marquis himself to view him as part of a distinct upper echelon of elites directly responsible for the security of the Zhou state.

Immediately afterward, the Marquis was invited into the King’s private chambers. This privilege, and the material gift of a weapon received along with it, established (or perhaps renewed) a direct, personal, private relationship between the royal house and the Marquis; at the same time, it likely further encouraged those elites not included in the process to see the Marquis as a qualitatively distinct partisan of the Zhou. 55 Finally, the public granting of large quantities of prestige goods brought the focus of the event fully to bear on the Marquis, depicting him as a fully actualized ruler within the Zhou state hierarchy. The Pangjing event assemblage thus progressively figured the Marquis as one allied elite among many and co-witness of the ancestral-ritual model tied to state authority; trusted follower and co-captain in the protection of the Zhou state; and individual honoree and client ruler, all within the space of a few days. 56 This

rapid sequential enactment of client elite identity, and others like it put forth at other royal ritual

events of the early Western Zhou, must have been a potent encouragement for observers toward

enrollment in the Zhou royal project, 57 arguing as they did that power, wealth, and recognition

54 I am operating under the assumption that the Marquis received no unusual recognition during the king’s feasting activity, given that the inscription takes pains to describe the details of the various other honors that the Marquis enjoyed throughout the event. 55 Undoubtedly the granting of a private audience in the middle of the sequence was a very great privilege; it must have acted to distinguish the Marquis from other guests at the event who were not afforded the same honor. 56 On figuration, see note 17. 57 On the concept of enrollment, see Callon, “Some elements of a sociology of translation,” 211-4.

307

were the direct results of participating in the patrilineal ancestral model, accepting the role of the

king as first among lineage heads, and supporting the king on campaign.

5.2.3.3: Materialized ideology and the relaying of royal rites through bronzes 58

In prior chapters, we have seen that ritual bronzes instantiated the ideal of lineage ritual and shared feast in durable material form; rites of figuration made arguments about the role of the king physically manifest; and bronze inscriptions, through their strong ethic of presence, distributed the agency of the royal person across multiple objects. 59 All of these elements of materialized ideology assisted in the “institutionalization and extension” of ideals of royal authority, lineage organization, and Zhou elite identity. 60 In the Mai fangzun inscription, we

have a detailed picture of the points of articulation between these phenomena – of the “zigzag”

between humans and non-humans – that made them so effective in forging the collective that

was Zhou elite identity. 61

In the Mai fangzun account, the above elements enter the equation immediately upon the

Marquis’s arrival at Pangjing, in that the performance of an ancestral offering at the royal feast

suggests that there were bronzes present. 62 The royal performance of ancestral offerings in the

58 On materialized ideology, see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, “Ideology,Materialization, and Power Strategies.” 59 Chapters 1, 3, and 1, respectively. 60 On “institutionalization and extension,” see DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle, 31. 61 For the “zigzag” between humans and objects, and for the concept of the “collective” in opposition to the concept of “society,” see Latour, Reassembling the Social , 74-5. Undoubtedly speech acts, inscriptions, and ritual movements are all “materialized ideology” in the sense used by DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle; see “Ideology, Materialization, and Power Strategies,” 16. 62 This assertion is not without controversy. Only two currently known bronzes, the Hu zhong and the Hu gui , are generally accepted to have been cast by a Western Zhou king; on these vessels see chapter 2. It is theoretically possible that the Zhou kings did not commission bronzes for their own ancestral temples in any volume. Given the demonstrated efforts of the Zhou kings to encourage local-level elites in the practice of the same rituals they used themselves (on which see chapter 2), however, I am quite convinced that the Zhou royal house must have possessed and used significant collections of bronzes. Our comparative lack of royal bronzes, I suspect, is but one facet of the overall lack of archaeological evidence on the Zhou kings, reflecting the fact that we may not have found the remains of their tombs or lineage temples (though for a potential counterexample, see Xu Tianjin, “Zhougongmiao yizhi de kaogu suohuo ji suosi,” Wenwu 2006.8, 55-62; see especially Xu’s discussion of

308

context of hospitality provision provided attendees with a precedent of the social engagement of

bronzes in an environment of combined camaraderie and political opportunity; they would have

seen the bronzes personally and received material sustenance from them as an expression of the

favor of the king as lineage head. On the following day, the Great Rite created a chronologically

compressed and mimetically charged depiction of the role of the king and his relationship to

favored clients; this figuration was made physically manifest through the cosmologically

significant space of the biyong pond, the relative position of the king and the Marquis, and, not

least, the king’s ability to shoot birds. 63 The subsequent conferral of abundant and sumptuous accoutrements upon the Marquis created another ritual manifestation of patronage, this time emphasizing the rewards and recognition it produced.

Effective though they might have been, these materializations of desired human relationships in ritual could operate directly only on their direct observers and participants. The items that the Marquis received – the ornate dagger-axe, chariot and horse, courtly clothes, and, of course, the human gifts – could carry some of the ideas expressed at the event about his status, both as a powerful figure capable of possessing valuables and as a protégé, and thus by implication a subordinate, of the king. More ephemeral aspects of the process, however – the image of the Marquis in his red-flagged boat following the king about the pond, the triumphant moment of his receipt of the accoutrements of rulership – were in danger of disappearing, and the gifts themselves of becoming divorced from the contexts that provided them.

Here, the bronzes and their inscriptions stood ready to pick up the relay. The custom of the production of inscribed bronzes for lineage cults provided a ready physical medium for the

previous opinions on the nature of the Zhougongmiao site on pp. 61-2). It is also possible that some of the many extant bronzes without inscriptions belonged to Zhou kings; for reasons discussed in chapter 2, there is a tendency for the longest bronze inscriptions to adorn bronzes commissioned by lower-ranking elites. 63 On figuration, see note 17.

309

commemoration of the Pangjing event at the local level. The ethic of presence inherent to that

custom ensured that the portrayal would record concrete details of moments of contact between

the Zhou king and the beneficiary of the event. 64 The result was a relatively faithful record of the ephemeral manifestations of idealized relations at the Pangjing event in durable bronze. The use of those bronzes in lineage ritual ensured that a local-level audience of Zhou-affiliate elites would be exposed to the efforts of the Pangjing event to materialize relations. The inscription recorded the physical details of the Great Rite for the visualization of local ritual participants, and it contextualized the lavish accoutrements brought back by the Marquis in terms of the royal patronage that produced them. In the meantime, the bronzes themselves created a physical manifestation of the lineage in terms of the favor that individual members had received outside it.

Accompanying practices such as gao -reporting to ancestors and zhu -invocation ensured that the

content of the inscriptions would reach the ears of lineage members, both living and dead; and

indeed, the Mai fangzun inscription informs us that the Marquis performed just such an

announcement on his return from Pangjing. The bronzes thus passed the torch of royal patronage

and ideology back to living observers and participants.

The sequence does not stop there, however. Most of the bronze inscriptions translated in

this work record honors that their commissioners received directly from the king or, occasionally,

other power-holders. The Mai fangzun does not; though most of its inscription is dedicated to

the Marquis’s activities, the vessel itself was produced by the Marquis’s subordinate Mai.

Whether to partake in a share of the event’s prestige, because he had taken part in the event

himself, or because he was involved in the production of the commemorative record, Mai saw fit

to include the details of the Pangjing event in the inscription of the bronze he commissioned after

receiving a reward of metal from the Marquis. This bronze was then to support interactions with

64 On the “ethic of presence” in the creation of inscribed bronzes, see chapter 1.

310

the ancestors, compatriots, and patrons of Mai and his descendants (as the inscription itself

specifies), all of whom would thereby come into contact with the material manifestation of the

event.

The Marquis’s gift to Mai, then, supported the creation of another link in the relay of

materialized ideology from Zongzhou into the local context. The Mai fangzun inscription does not specify the details of the relationship between the Marquis and Mai, though we know from

Mai’s other bronzes that he held a post of some responsibility in Xing; it is possible that the two belonged to the same lineage. 65 Based on Mai’s declaration that the fangzun would play a role in hosting the Marquis, however, we may presume that Mai belonged either to a different lineage than the Marquis or to a branch lineage with a separate household unit and separate cult facilities.

The material manifestation of royal ritual in Mai’s bronze and the record of the Pangjing event assemblage it bore thus cascaded down into another level of the local interaction sphere.

In most cases, the material transmission of royal ritual ideology was set down after local elites commissioned bronzes commemorating their personal contact with the king. 66 Its efficacy was from that point on limited by the degree of exposure to bronzes, their inscriptions, and the gifts they recorded that was available to local elites through the workings of ancestral cult events.

It was therefore in the interest of the Zhou kings to encourage the performance of such events, which they did by conducting exemplary feasts with ancestral offerings and, eventually, by providing livestock offerings for sacrifice. 67

65 The inscription of the Mai ding 麥鼎 (2706), for example, records that Mai accompanied the Marquis on a military campaign. 66 The inscription of the Ze Ling vessels offers another example of the operation of royal influence in the local ancestral cult as mediated by a gift from royal appointee to subordinate, though its description of the contact between the king and the appointee Duke Ming is much less detailed. This inscription is discussed in part in chapter 2; for a full translation, see Bureaucracy , 51. 67 On this point see chapter 2.

311

The Zhou kings did not, however, have a monopoly on the depiction of patronage in

bronze inscriptions. Many bronzes record recognition and rewards received from individuals

with the titles gong 公 and hou 侯, showing that non-royal elites sometimes arrogated the power

of inscribed bronzes in their own interest. Competition likely existed within the ritual

assemblages of lineages between figurations of the king and of his client rulers as agents of

patronage. The “ethic of presence” facilitated that competition, allowing the distributed

presence of the king to exercise far more direct influence in local contexts than would be

possible without the mediating help of vessels and their inscriptions. 68 Sources such as the Mai fangzun and the Ze Ling inscriptions suggest that the royal figuration sometimes won out, driving the creation of narratives of indirect contact with the king even when the gift prompting creation of the bronze was received at the hands of a lesser patron. 69 The exceptional narrative of the Mai fangzun inscription thus offers an unusually detailed glimpse of the power of royal

ritual to penetrate local contexts through the medium of bronzes and their inscriptions, made

possible by the aggregation of ancestral offerings, ritual of figuration, and patronage ritual in the

royal event at Pangjing.

5.3: The transformation of Western Zhou ritual

Inscriptions of the late-early and early-middle Western Zhou – that is to say, those dating to the reigns of King Zhao, King Mu, and, to a much lesser extent, King Gong – portray a wide range of changes in the approach of the Zhou royal house to ritual events. Major royal events based around Shang-style offerings to the royal ancestors, like those recorded in the Shu Ze fangding , Mai fangzun , and Xiao Yu ding inscriptions, disappear from the record as of the reign

68 On the concept of “distributed presence,” see Gell, Art and Agency , 102-4, 230-51. 69 It is perhaps of note that both Mai and Ze Ling bore the title of Document Maker and so may have had a greater than usual interest in the content and format of their inscriptions.

312

of King Zhao. The last recorded royal performances of the su , yue , rong , and hui ritual

techniques thus predate that reign. Nor, based on currently available inscriptions, does it seem

that the reign of King Zhao saw a royal performance of the di offering, though the Xian gui records such an offering conducted under King Mu. Generally speaking, judging from the bronze inscriptions, the range of Shang-style ancestral-ritual techniques that the Zhou kings publicly performed during this period shrank significantly from that of the earlier reigns.

This is not to say, however, that the kings of this era abandoned Shang-style ancestral ritual as a strategy of group formation. The Ren ding and the Rong Zhong ding , both dating to approximately this period, record the royal gift, through intermediaries, of pen-raised cattle to non-royal elites for ancestral offerings ([ ting ] sheng da/tai lao 脡牲大/太牢). The latter gift took

place after the king constructed a building for Rong Zhong, suggesting a royal interest in

supporting the physical infrastructure of lineage ritual. The Da gui , dating probably to the reign

of King Mu, describes a royal gift of livestock to a non-royal figure for the purpose of

conducting the di/chi offering. Though the kings of the post-Kang period may have reduced the

range of Shang-style offerings incorporated into their own events, inscriptions thus show that

these kings – in all likelihood, King Mu in particular – made a concerted effort to support the

performance of ancestral livestock offerings among non-royal elites as a venue of elite

interaction and patronage. The record of the Duke’s performance of di and rong in the Fan you ,

probably a King Mu vessel, shows that this effort took hold in some cases. The fact that the

middle Western Zhou saw the greatest overall production of inscribed bronzes declaring the hui -

entreaty, a mainstay of early Western Zhou royal ancestral-ritual events, as their purpose may be

seen as additional evidence of that point; alternatively, it may simply reflect the ongoing

importance of ritual communication with ancestors in the lives of non-royal elites.

313

As the Zhou kings scaled back their use of earlier, ancestral-ritual offerings at hospitality

events, they introduced a host of new ritual techniques highlighting internal relations between the

king and various elements of the state. The earliest recorded case of a royally sponsored archery

meet probably occurred during the reign of King Zhao, as recorded in the recently discovered

Zhabo gui . So too did the main case of the ritual ploughing of fields by the king known from the

Western Zhou period, recorded on the Ling ding . The reign of King Mu saw further royal sponsorship of archery meets as well as the appearance of the institutional infrastructure of archery in the inscriptional record, as reflected in the inscriptions of the Chang Xin he , the Ban gui , and the Jing gui . King Mu’s reign, or possibly King Gong’s, was also the time of the first foal-catching rite, the symbolic catching and subsequent distribution of foals by the king, commemorated both on and by the extraordinary Li juzun . Finally, the official appointment ritual emerged during the reign of King Mu in much the same form that it would bear for the rest of the Western Zhou period, quickly coming to dominate the corpus of long inscriptions.

In the meantime, the use of the old recognition ceremony of mieli continued through this period, though its association with elites of Shang heritage weakened. The royal implementation thereof was separated entirely from the military infrastructure during King Mu’s reign; outside the royal house, however, the powerful figure Marshal/Elder Father Yong conducted several mieli in conjunction with his campaign activities. King Mu conducted one lavish instance of the rare but vital “Great Rite,” recorded in the inscription of the Bo Tangfu ding ; no such case survives from the reign of his predecessor King Zhao. Royal performances of the zheng -offering, recorded in the Duan gui inscription, and the burning of ears known to the Zhou as liao , recorded on the Yongbo X gui , also probably date to this period. 70 No records of zhu -invocations from

70 Based on its appearance, my personal suspicion is that the Yongbo X ding dates to the reign of King Mu; see chapter 2.

314

this period exist; however, the appearance of figures bearing the title of zhu , “Invoker,” in

inscriptions such as that of the Chang Xin he suggest that the position, if not the practice, was

institutionalized by the reign of King Mu, if not before. All these points, along with King Mu’s

performance of the di/chi offering as recorded on the Xian gui , attest to some selective

continuation of the ritual techniques of the early Western Zhou.

5.3.1: The crisis of Zhou royal power and the historical context of the transition

The above material shows that the reigns of King Zhao and King Mu saw a substantial

shift in the ritual program of the Zhou royal house. The precise role of King Zhao in this process

is difficult to determine. Due to the higher prevalence of dating-standard bronzes, some of

which have furnished data on particular rites for this study, it is easier to date bronzes to the

reign of King Mu with relative certainty than to that of King Zhao. 71 Still, the record suggests that the reign of King Zhao hosted a number of changes in the Zhou royal ritual program. New practices such as the royal sponsorship of archery meets and the symbolic ploughing of fields by the king coincided with a near-complete lack of most of the Shang-style ritual techniques that contributed to early Western Zhou ritual event assemblies. With respect to the infrastructure of royal ancestral ritual, the reign of King Zhao seems to have seen the first creation of a structure dedicated to a single king, the “Kang Palace” or “Kang Temple” ( Kang Gong 康宫) at Zhou, which would later house several cases of the official appointment ceremony. 72 It appears likely

71 Shaughnessy lists seven dating standard bronzes for the reign of King Mu, as opposed to three – all commissioned by the same figure – for King Zhao; see Sources , 110-1. 72 The question of the nature of the structures called gong 宫 and their role in the religious and political life of the Western Zhou has been an active debate in the field for decades. Tang Lan argued convincingly that gong bearing the names of Western Zhou kings were ancestral temples dedicated to those kings; see Tang Lan, “Xi Zhou jinwen duandai zhong de Kang Gong wenti,” Kaogu xuebao 1962.1, 15-48. This likely argument is complicated by the fact that no extant inscriptions describe sacrifices made to deceased kings in the gong bearing their names; see Bureaucracy , 107. Others have read the gong bearing royal names as palaces in which those kings lived; see Duandai , 35-40; Daxi , 7. Li Feng has recently shown that the gong mentioned in Western Zhou inscriptions fall

315 that King Zhao intended a change in the role of ritual in the Zhou royal government. What direction that change might eventually have taken, and what effect it might have had on the subsequent course of early Chinese history, is impossible to say, due to the early demise of the king and its aftershocks.

As has been discussed in the previous chapter, the death of King Zhao on his unsuccessful campaign of southward expansion and the various military actions, both defensive and offensive, of King Mu’s reign together sounded the death knell for the expansion of the

Zhou state. From this point in the Western Zhou period on, the Zhou kings found themselves in a situation much like that of the last Shang kings: struggling simultaneously to consolidate control over the core regions of the Zhou state and to maintain the allegiance of a vast network of affiliate sites sharing many common elite practices and tied to the royal house through varying degrees of kinship and marriage. The relative proportions and character of royal and non-royal mieli ceremonies dating to King Mu’s reign suggest the degree to which royal models of patronage were shaken by these events; non-royal mieli inscriptions record mostly the patronage activities of the powerful aristocrat Marshal/Elder Father Yong, while King Mu himself conducted mieli mainly in conjunction with ritual events.

5.3.2: The peak of Western Zhou ritual diversity under King Mu

into three basic categories: those named after kings, which were in all likelihood sites of ancestral-ritual devotions toward those kings; those named after individuals or official titles, which were “offices” in which those persons worked and, potentially, lived and carried out ancestral-ritual activities; and those with names suggesting particular uses or describing their physical surroundings, a few of which in fact served as royal domiciles. See Bureaucracy , 114-8 (on the performance of the official appointment ceremony in the Kang Gong , see p. 119); Li Feng, “Offices,” 65-71. For further discussion of the problem of the Kang Gong , see Shaughnessy, Sources , 199- 201. Of note to the present discussion is that the Kang Gong is the first such location named after an individual Western Zhou king; following the model that it was dedicated to a deceased king as a site for offerings, it would therefore probably have been built during the reign of King Zhao. That the beginning of this custom occurred during King Zhao’s reign offers further evidence that certain changes which (as is discussed below) became standard aspects of Western Zhou royal ritual began at that point.

316

It can hardly be a coincidence that the reign of King Mu also saw the peak of the range

and diversity of royal ritual techniques. The royal ritual of the early Western Zhou relied heavily

on patronage models with roots in military endeavor and the ritual figuration of the king as

leader of a military coalition. However, the failed campaigns in the south presumably produced

neither spoils for distribution nor victories to support polemical rituals such as that depicted in

the Xiao Yu ding narrative; and what gains there were from the defensive war that followed seem to have accrued to Marshal/Elder Father Yong rather than the king. Subsequent campaigns by King Mu to the west provided resources, both material and symbolic, supporting the final performance of a “Great Rite” in the Western Zhou record; but these campaigns do not seem to have driven further ritual events involving the acknowledgement of non-royal elites, as with the

Xiao Yu ding event or the various cases of mieli in the inscriptions. King Mu was thus faced with a shortage of the rhetorical capital that supported key elements of many early Western Zhou ritual event assemblies.

In the face of this shortage, the king drew on a number of emergent ritual techniques to support the continued reiteration of the collective of the Zhou state with the Zhou kings at its head. New rites of royal figuration simultaneously portrayed the king as the necessary source of vital resources and created ritual contexts of royal control over key production activities. New ritual instantiations of royal patronage standardized the process of official recognition and created outlets for competition between non-royal elites. Together with the institutionalization of the infrastructure of ritual archery and invocation, these new techniques formed an overall ritual program aimed at heightening the degree of control that the king exercised over the details of the operation of the Zhou state. They created new opportunities for royal patronage, but they

317

also refocused royal efforts on the internal differentiation of adherents in an environment of

limited material and ideological resources.

While these recent innovations provided the king with a number of new tools for the ritual

consolidation of the Zhou collective and the fine control of state operations, King Mu

supplemented them with older techniques of both Shang and Zhou provenance. The last

recorded performance of the Great Rite depicted King Mu’s western campaigns in the same

terms as those of earlier kings. The king performed the offering known as di/chi himself while at

the same time working to support the use of ancestral livestock offerings, including di/chi,

among non-royal lineages; this effort seems to have borne fruit, judging from the Duke’s use of

rong and di/chi in the event recorded on the Fan you . Neither the di/chi rite nor the Great Rite

was conducted under King Zhao’s watch, as far as can be told from the extant inscriptions. King

Mu seems intentionally to have revived outmoded ritual techniques, broadening the overall royal

ritual program, in an effort to create non-military opportunities for interaction with and patronage

of non-royal Zhou elites. 73

In terms of the overall variety of both ritual techniques and strategies of group performation, the reign of King Mu was the heyday of Western Zhou royal ritual. If, as the saying goes, “the great affairs of the state lie in offerings and war,” then King Mu and his faction seem to have expanded the former to compensate for contraction of the latter. 74 Much of this diversity was

lost in the subsequent reigns, or at least ceased to drive the production of inscribed bronzes. The

reign of King Mu saw the last recorded occurrences of the di and rong offerings, as well as of the

Great Rite that played such an important role in early Western Zhou figurations of the king. The evidence for the continuation of the royal ploughing rite is weak. Royally sponsored archery

73 The royal zheng -offering recorded in the inscription of the Duan gui may be another case of this; unfortunately, it is not feasible to date the Duan gui definitively to the reign of King Mu versus that of King Zhao. 74 Zuozhuan , Duke Cheng, 13 th year, 8.13, Shisanjing zhushu , 1911.

318

meets continued as important linchpin events of ritual assemblies, however, and the foal-catching

rite seems likewise to have survived throughout most of the period. Most famously, the

standardized appointment ritual introduced during King Mu’s day became the single most

common subject of long bronze inscriptions throughout the rest of the Western Zhou period.

Ritually speaking, the contrast between the diversified strategy of the reign of King Mu

and the consolidative strategy of those following was enormous. It is perhaps due to the degree

of this contrast that King Mu became known to later generations as frivolous and unconcerned

with vital affairs of state. 75 Through late Western Zhou eyes, the range of ritual activities conducted under King Mu must have seemed extravagant; in their time, however, they helped bridge the gap between incommensurate formulations of the Zhou collective and the king’s place in it.

5.3.3: The rites of the post-King Mu period

The reign of King Mu was the swan song of publicly performed, Shang-style royal ancestral offerings. Of the various ritual techniques of Shang provenance described above, only the hui-entreaty, the yu -negative entreaty, the zheng -offering, and the zhu -invocation appear in bronze inscriptions of post-King Mu date. 76 Moreover, yu appears only in two inscriptions

attributed to King Li, in which it is not distinguished from the positive entreaty hui ; zhu -

invocation is mentioned in the inscription of the Qian gui as the name of an office; and zheng and hui appear only as declared purposes of non-royal vessels.

Royal ritual activities recorded in post-King Mu bronze inscriptions are confined mainly to the new techniques introduced during the reigns of King Zhao and King Mu, including the

75 The classical sources of this tradition are summarized in Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 323. 76 The one possible exception of which I know is the Da gui , which, as mentioned above, may date to the reign of King Mu or that of King Gong, the following king.

319

foal-catching rite, ritual archery meets, the official appointment ritual, and, potentially, the royal

ploughing rite. The foal-catching rite appears on inscriptions dating probably to the reigns of

Kings Gong, Xiao, and Xuan; the Ninth-year Qiu Wei ding , a dating standard for the reign of

King Gong, mentions a structure called the “Foal Palace,” hinting that some infrastructure may

have been established to support the rite. Whether the royal ploughing rite introduced under

King Zhao continued during this period remains in question; however, the royal instruction to the

Supervisor of Land Zai to take charge of the ploughing of fields, recorded in the Zai gui , may indicate that it persisted into the later Western Zhou. Royally sponsored archery meets, seen for the first time during King Zhao’s reign and intensified during King Mu’s, continued in the following reigns. The inscription of the Ehou Yufang ding records one such event dating to the reign of King Yi or, more likely, King Li; meanwhile, the Fifteenth-year Quecao ding and the

Kuang you show that official facilities for archery, first mentioned during the reign of King Mu, continued to exist through at least the reign of King Yih. 77 Kings Gong and Yih continued the

storied custom of the mieli recognition ritual with some frequency and in circumstances

suggesting that they had recovered a degree of military influence; this custom continued at least

until the reign of King Li, likely time of production of the Wu gui (4323), albeit less frequently.

Meanwhile, the official appointment ritual introduced under King Mu thrived, becoming the single most common topic of long bronze inscriptions from the post-King Mu period. As portrayed in the inscriptions, the royal ritual of the post-King Mu period thus consisted mainly of ritual techniques that both figured the king as the source of vital resources and established royal control over those resources; and ritual techniques that facilitated differentiation between adherent elites and created organized venues for competition for royal patronage outside the infrastructure of the Zhou military. The mieli of the subsequent reigns suggest also that those

77 The first such mentionwas that of the “Archery Study Palace” in the inscription of the Jing gui ; see chapter 4.

320

kings reestablished some degree of interface with the military administration as a venue of

patronage.

Outside the realm of royal activity, the post-King Mu inscriptions offer a wealth of data

on the ancestral ritual activities of non-royal elites. The hui-entreaty continues as a declared purpose of several non-royal vessels. It is joined by the zheng -offering, stated as the purpose of

the commissioning of the Taishi Cuo gui and the Ji ding , as well as the technique known as chang 嘗, likely referring to an offering of the first fruits of the harvest, which is mentioned on the Sixth-year Zhousheng gui (probably dating to King Xuan) and on the Ji ding together with

zheng . Individual inscriptions record cases of the techniques sui (recorded in the Maogong ding )

and zhuo (mentioned on the Bo Gongfu shao , which were clearly intended for the purpose). Sui ,

chang , and zhuo appear for the first time in the late Western Zhou bronze inscriptions as

potential ritual techniques, although sui has ample precedent in the Shang oracle bones and is

attributed to King Cheng in the Shangshu . The term yin sees its first Western Zhou appearance

earlier, in the famous inscription of the Shi Qiang pan , wherein Scribe Qiang uses it in the

compound term yinsi to refer to his grandfather’s ritual offerings; it appears also in the later

inscription of the Nanshi Dian hu .

All told, then, the post-King Mu inscriptions contain no shortage of references to specific

ritual offering techniques. Some of these, such as hui -entreaty and zheng -offering, carried on

ritual traditions dating back to the Shang; hui in particular is a commonly expressed purpose for

the casting of inscribed bronzes. Others, particularly those dating to the late Western Zhou, are

innovations in ritual vocabulary, or, like sui (and like King Li’s use of the negative entreaty term

yu ), seem to have diverged from the senses they carried in earlier sources. Two vital points may

be gleaned from this state of affairs. First, the disappearance of specific ancestral devotions from

321

royal ritual event assemblies did not indicate that the overall population of Zhou elites had

discarded the performance of patrilineal-ancestral ritual. Indeed, the creation of facilities named

for deceased kings continued probably through the reign of King Xuan, suggesting that the kings

also continued to conduct ancestral offerings; but the narratives of these royal offerings did not

play the role in the inscriptional record that they previously had. 78 Second, the post-King Mu period saw a divergence of the ritual concerns of non-royal elites and those of the royal house, with the former achieving a greater degree of representation in the inscriptions of bronze vessels.

This culminated in the introduction of several new terms for ritual techniques in the inscriptions of the late Western Zhou, suggesting that by the late Western Zhou period the ritual practices of non-royal lineages had diverged appreciably from those of the Zhou kings. 79

5.4: The issue of the “ritual reform” or “ritual revolution”

78 Li Feng observes that gong 宫 named for Kings Kang, Zhao, Mu, and Yi 夷 appear in the inscriptions; see Bureaucracy, 153. In addition, there is a set of bells the inscriptions of which narrate an event carried out in the “La 剌 Palace of the Kang [Palace] at Zhou” ( Zhou Kang La Gong 周康剌宮) (Ke zhong 克鐘 [204, 206, 208, 209]). The term la 剌 is used to indicate King Li in the inscriptions of the Wu Hu ding 吳虎鼎 (NA0709) and the Lai pan 逨盤 (NA0757). On these vessels see Li Xueqin,”Wu Hu ding kaoshi – Xia Shang Zhou duandai gongcheng kaoguxue biji,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1998.3, 29-31; Mu Xiaojun, “Shaanxi Chang’an xian chutu Xi Zhou Wu Hu ding,” in ibid., 69-71; Wenwu 2003.6, 16-27. It is thus quite likely that the La Gong mentioned in the Ke zhong inscription was a facility dedicated to King Li, established in all likelihood during the reign of King Xuan rather than that of the usurper Gong He. Falkenhausen thus includes King Li in his corresponding list in Chinese Society , 64, n. 56. The lack of references to buildings dedicated to King Yih 懿 and King Xiao can be explained politically. The succession of King Xiao was irregular, inasmuch as he was the uncle rather than the son of the preceding King Yih. After his death, King Xiao was succeeded by King Yi, who was King Yih’s son. The throne thus transitioned out of and then back into the main line of the royal house, a very unusual situation for the Zhou; this may have indicated factionalism within the royal court. (On this situation see Shiji , “Zhou ben ji,” 140-1; Bureaucracy, 34.) It is quite likely that King Xiao did not arrange for the creation of a space dedicated to King Yih, given that King Yih was not in fact King Xiao’s ancestor. Likewise, King Yi’s succession was a restoration of the direct royal line of descent, and so it is not unlikely that King Xiao was intentionally left out of the physical infrastructure of royal lineage activities, whether because he did not fit the genealogical mold or out of political opposition to his rule. Explaining the absence of a space dedicated to King Gong from the inscriptions, however, will require further evidence than is now available. 79 Most scholars date the Sixth-year Zhousheng gui to the reign of King Xuan; see Landscape and Power, 107, note 50. For a list of these datings, see Shirakawa 3.2.194-5, 841, 860. Ma Chengyuan dissents, dating it to King Xiao; see MWX 290, 209. The Maogong ding is probably also a King Xuan bronze; see Daxi , 136; MWX , 447; Bureaucracy , 85. Both the excavators and the AS database assign the Bo Gongfu shao to the late Western Zhou; for the former, see Wenwu 1978.11, 7.

322

This work has focused largely on the practice of ritual by the Zhou, and the Zhou kings in

particular, in the era preceding the changes in the Western Zhou archaeological record now

generally known as the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform.” 80 That focus derives from the

reliance of the work on bronze inscriptions as sources on Western Zhou ritual, in contrast with

the chief characterizations of the “ritual reform,” based mainly on analyses of the types,

quantities, and physical qualities of bronze vessels. 81 Falkenhausen has previously noted a

chronological gap between indications of social change in the inscriptional and archaeological

records of the Western Zhou. 82 This study has confirmed that the gap in question extended to the

royal implementation of ritual practices. It is my hope that the above observations on early-

middle Western Zhou ritual have drawn a clearer background against which the sudden changes

of the ritual reform may be better understood.

Many of the individual ritual techniques observed in this study fade from the inscriptional

record or disappear altogether after the reign of King Mu. Based on the disappearance of those

phenomena, on earlier considerations of the “ethic of presence” and other ideological

conceptions underlying Zhou ritual at different points, and on the changes in the Zhou royal

strategy of ritual throughout the period, the following pages put forth some tentative suggestions

as to the nature and timing of the ritual revolution and its relationship to the changing figurations

of the Zhou collective.

80 Jessica Rawson and Lothar von Falkenhausen are the main proponents of this model. For the most recent statements thereof, see Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 433-46; Rawson, “Statesmen or Barbarians? The Western Zhou as Seen through their Bronzes,” Proceedings of the British Academy 75 (1989), pp. 89-93; Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 56-64. Shaughnessy has put forth an analysis of the “Zhou song” that draws on Rawson’s model; see Before Confucius , 184-7. 81 See previous note. Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , engages in some detailed discussion of bronze inscriptions; however, the emphasis is on the sequence of the Wei lineage rather than the vocabulary of ritual in the inscriptions. 82 Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 29 n. 1, which notes that Shaughnessy singles out the reign of King Mu as a time of political and military reform; for this account see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 323-8.

323

5.4.1: The “ritual reform” argument and its correlation with the bronze inscriptions

The essence of the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform” argument is that the types and

numbers of bronze vessels used in Zhou ancestral ritual underwent a systematic change

sometime after the midpoint of the period. In particular, many of the vessel types used for liquor

during the Shang and early Western Zhou periods were dispensed with in favor of one main type

of large wine vessel, usually found in pairs, and the food vessels known as gui -tureens and ding - cauldrons began to appear in matching sets. Bronze ornamentation became larger, rougher, and more abstract; and sets of bronze zhong -bells entered the repertoire of casters in the Zhou heartland. 83 These changes, it is suggested, related to a systemic change in the performance of

Zhou elite ritual, likely involving the expansion of audiences, the scaling down of wine offerings,

and the strengthening of the division between participants and observers of the ritual

performance. 84 The chief proponents of this model have put forth different datings of these

changes. Rawson situates them in the reigns of the latter half of the middle Western Zhou

(Kings Yih-Yi) and sees them as having originated from the center of the Zhou state. 85

Falkenhausen locates these changes in the reign of King Li and emphasizes their likely intent to

support the existing government; hence, he refers to the phenomenon as the “Late Western Zhou

Ritual Reform.” 86

The textual evidence on Zhou ritual contained in the bronze inscriptions shows that changes in the techniques and strategy of royal ritual events began as early as the reign of King

83 Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 435-8; Sackler , pp. 93-8. On the use of gui and ding sets as markers of rank, see also Yu Weichao and Gao Ming, “Zhou dai yong ding zhidu yanjiu,” Beijing daxue xuebao 1978.1, 85- 99; 1978.2, 85-98; 1979.1, 84-97. 84 On the growth of the ritual audience and the division between participants and observers, see Rawson, “Statesmen or Barbarians?”, 89-91; Shaughnessy relates the Zhou Hymns to this proposed division in Before Confucius , 165- 6, 184-7; see also “Western Zhou History,” 332-3. On the scaling down of wine offerings, see Falkenhausen, Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius , 49. 85 Rawson, “Statesmen or Barbarians?”, 87-93; “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 433-40; Sackler , 93-110, 125. 86 Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 29-31, 43-53.

324

Zhao, when long narratives built around royal ancestral offerings subsided, the first evidence for

royally sponsored archery meets and the royal ploughing rite appeared, and the first facility

named for a single deceased king (the Kang Gong ) was probably built. Some of these changes were reversed under King Mu, who made use of older ritual techniques such as di/chi and the

Great Rite. However, King Mu (or, at least, his administration) continued and institutionalized

the custom of archery meets begun earlier and also introduced the dominant meme of the

appointment ritual and, probably, the foal-catching rite.

As is pointed out above, the royal rituals of King Mu’s reign were the most diverse of the

entire Western Zhou period in terms of the range of ritual techniques and strategies of group

formation they pursued. While these changing royal strategies of ritual are clear from the

inscriptional record, however, they did not produce correspondingly drastic changes in bronze

vessels. The vessels of King Mu’s reign do show a high degree of distinctiveness in their

ornamentation; 87 suggesting that the king’s special interest in ritual may have included a program

of control over the design of bronzes; however, the vessel types of the transitional period are

essentially similar to those of the earlier reigns.88

The royal ritual repertoire of the post-King Mu period contracted substantially. It was concerned mainly with the differential recognition of Zhou elites through the relatively recent technique of the appointment ritual, along with the occasional royal archery meet; as well as the ongoing figuration of the king as an obligatory passage point for vital production activities, through the foal-catching rite and, potentially, the continuation of the royal ploughing rite.

Royal ancestral offerings go almost completely unmentioned in post-King Mu inscriptions. By contrast, the records of non-royal ancestral-ritual activities in the inscriptions continue to be rich,

87 See Bureaucracy , 37. 88 Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 360.

325

judging in particular from the declaration of hui -entreaty and zheng -offering as the purposes

behind the creation of vessels. By the late Western Zhou, these terms were joined by the new

vocabulary items chang , sui , and zhuo as expressions of non-royal elite ritual activities. In

essence, the ancestral offerings of the Zhou royal house ceased to drive the production of ritual

bronzes, while those of non-royal elites remained an important factor in the process. However,

most recorded mieli ceremonies postdating King Mu were performed by the Zhou kings. The same was true of archery meets and of the appointment ceremony. 89

In the traces of ritual techniques in the post-Mu inscriptions, then, there is a sharp division between royally sponsored activities, consisting almost entirely of interactions between the king, subordinate elites, and the infrastructure of resource production; and non-royal activities, in which ancestral devotions still played a vital role. This state of affairs corresponds fairly closely to the timing of the changes that Rawson observes in the Western Zhou archaeological record.

The shift in focus of royal ritual techniques away from Shang-style ancestral offerings occurred by the reign of King Gong, the reign before Rawson proposes that the ritual revolution began. 90

In all likelihood, the removal of exemplary Shang-style royal-ancestral offerings from ritual event assemblies, the focus on archery competitions and the appointment ceremony, and the proliferation of numbered sets of bronzes in the archaeological record – a key element of the archaeological formulation of the “ritual revolution” – all formed part of an ongoing royal effort to achieve consolidation and differentiation within the Zhou collective. 91 This effort at

89 Among the hundred-plus records of the appointment ceremony, there are only two very special cases that were not performed by the king; see Bureaucracy , 40. 90 See note 87. 91 These changes overlap with the increased bureaucratization that is now widely recognized to have occurred during the middle Western Zhou period; the processes may have been related or have stemmed from similar motivations. See Bureaucracy , 63-85 , 104-5; Hsu and Linduff, Western Chou Civilization , 227; Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 326. In particular, Bureaucracy ’s observations on the changing relationship between the positions of Document Maker and Interior Scribe suggest an effort to consolidate royal power over precisely the reigns to which Rawson assigns the ritual revolution; see Bureaucracy , 76-7. On the use of numbered sets of bronzes as a

326

consolidation and reinforcement of Zhou royal ritual is reminiscent of the process Keightley

observes with respect to the ritual practices of the final Shang kings. 92 It was part of a similar effort to shore up royal control in the core regions of a shrinking interaction sphere. 93

At the same time, the cessation of example performances of ancestral rites by the Zhou kings, and of the direct royal patronage of ancestral livestock offerings, created a break between the ritual conducted at royal events and that carried out under the rubric of individual elite lineages. The continuing production of bronzes earmarked for hui -entreaty shows that ancestral devotions remained important to non-royal elites in the wake of this break. The emergence of a new vocabulary of ancestral ritual in non-royal inscriptions of the late Western Zhou suggests that non-royal ritual practices had developed their own character by that point.

Many of these practices emerged after the set of changes observed by Rawson were complete. This offers some support for Rawson’s model of a top-down effort to control ritual assemblies dating to the reigns of Kings Yih, Xiao, and Yi, as it likely indicates that the royal house maintained an ongoing interest in the ritual of non-elite lineages throughout that preceding period.

Many of the new vocabulary items emerging at this point – chang , zhuo , and yin in particular – became important parts of later characterizations of Zhou ritual. This fact, along with the above observations on the changing strategies of Western Zhou royal ritual, may help us to understand the relationship between the depictions of ritual in Western Zhou bronze inscriptions and those in received texts of purported Western Zhou date.

hallmark of the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform” argument, see Rawson, “Western Zhou Archaeology,” 435; Falkenhausen, Chinese Society, 49-52. 92 See notes 41 and 45. 93 See Bureaucracy , 36-7; Landscape and Power , 122-7.

327

5.4.2: Causes of the “ritual reform”

At the time of the “ritual reform,” after the transition period of Zhou ritual, the royal

house faced the aftereffects of the failure of the expansion that had previously sustained its state

project. The royal house recovered somewhat from the crisis point reached after the death of

King Zhao and during the reign of King Mu, regaining some control over the state military

apparatus. However, the overall military situation of the Zhou did not improve appreciably over

the remainder of the Western Zhou period. There was to be no second great expansion, but

instead an ongoing process of consolidation and defense. 94

That had serious implications for the model of group formation pursued by the Zhou kings.

A lack of newly captured territory and wealth meant that the large bequeathals of populations

and territories that prior kings had conducted were no longer possible, and smaller bequeathals of

wealth had to come from the resources of the royal house. 95 Further, the cessation of expansion

on the periphery removed a key tool that had previously helped manage surfeits of influential

figures close to the throne, as with the granting of states to the lines of the Dukes in the early

Western Zhou. 96 The intangible but still limited resource of prestige won on campaign with the king was also in short supply, reducing the number of opportunities for the king to promote himself as the arbiter of status within the Zhou collective. Finally, the failure of the expansionist project called into question the figuration of the king as war leader that had held sway during the early Western Zhou.

Demographic issues compounded these problems. It has been proposed elsewhere that the

expansion of elite lineages and their division into branches led to a loosening of connections with

94 See Bureaucracy , 35-6; Landscape and Power , 3; Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 320-5. 95 See Bureaucracy , 36-7; Landscape and Power , 122-7. 96 On the conflict between the Dukes of Gong and Shao as a factor in the political history of the Western Zhou, see Shaughnessy, “Western Zhou History,” 313-7.

328

the royal house. 97 Chapter 1 of this work has shown that expressions of kinship as an element of

elite individual identity became more common over the course of the Western Zhou period.

These loosening ties took political form in the loss of royal control over the eastern states during

the reign of King Mu. 98 It seems that the non-royal elite population was expanding despite the

difficulties of the Zhou royal house and the failure of Zhou expansion.

The middle Western Zhou kings were thus in need of a new approach to the management

of relations with and between adherents. They needed ways to give out less land and wealth

while still maintaining the coherence of the patronage relations that held the state together; to

intensify royal control over key state resources in the territory they still controlled; and to

naturalize and obscure the authority of the royal house, casting it as the natural order of the world

rather than an outgrowth of the king’s now-compromised figuration as leader of a military

coalition. Diplomatically speaking, they needed a way to interest the upper echelons of non-

royal lineages in maintaining the ongoing vision of the Zhou collective with the king at its head,

rather than breaking away to pursue models of identity based on individual and lineage; at the

same time, they needed a venue of interaction with powers in the east and south with whom they

shared cultural traits, but who were not fully cowed by the authority of the Zhou king.

5.4.2: The political logic of the “ritual reform” and the post-King Mu changes in Zhou royal

ritual

Both the post-King Mu changes to Zhou ritual discussed above and many classic points

of the “ritual reform” offered potential benefits of this sort. The foal-catching rite (and, in all

likelihood, the royal ploughing rite) acted to naturalize and obscure the origins of royal authority

97 Shaughnessy has previously noted the expansion of branch lineages and the distancing of relations with the royal house; see “Western Zhou History,” 327-8, 323. 98 Ibid., 323-5.

329

by casting the king as the “obligatory passage point” for necessary resources. This offered an

alternative to the failing image of the king as war leader prevalent in the early Western Zhou. At

the same time, it intensified royal control over the production of key resources; the foal-catching

rite in particular appears to have involved the royal claiming and redistribution of horses from

different locations. The official appointment ritual created a wealth of new images of the king as

disburser of status and riches in a context other than military victory. By standardizing the

sequence of appointment to office, it both intensified royal control over the developing

bureaucratic apparatus and institutionalized and legitimized a new context of competition

between elites, thus creating new opportunities for differentiation of status among its adherents.

Eventually, it created a source of revenue for the royal house in the expected contribution of jade

items by appointees. 99 Royally sponsored archery meets similarly created a context of competition and differentiation between elites, and in particular between representatives of the king and of powerful lineages (as, for example, in the inscription of the Chang Xin he [9455]).

At the same time, they provided a venue for diplomatic relations between Zhou royal representatives and other elites with Zhou cultural leanings, but of questionable allegiance; the interactions between the king and the elites of peripheral areas recorded in the Ehou Yufang ding and the Yi hegai are of this sort.

The classic manifestation of the “ritual revolution” or “ritual reform,” the creation of matching sets of ding-cauldrons and gui -tureens in varying numbers, is generally suggested to have been a marker of rank, as in later formulations of sumptuary rules. 100 No inscriptional evidence from the bronzes themselves is available to support this assertion. If true, however, sets of vessels served as a mechanism for differentiation both between lineages, in that the right to

99 See Bureaucracy , 107, 110. 100 See note 83.

330

use a certain number of vessels adhered to a lineage based on its relative status, and within

lineages, inasmuch as the inscriptions on such vessels still tend to record the actions of individual

lineage members. 101 The assignation of particular numbers of vessels to lineages of particular

rank would also have tended to naturalize the authority and coherence of individual lineage

identities, providing motivation for lineage heads of high rank to maintain their positions within

the Zhou cultural complex. 102

If, on the other hand, lineage members had some discretion in the number of bronzes they produced, then the capacity to cast multiple vessels would have created a venue for competition and differentiation within lineages based on personal wealth, allowing individual elites to maximize the representation of their individual royal audiences within the assemblages of their lineage cults. This would have served the interests of those individuals, in that they could best leverage their wealth to achieve status, as well as those of the royal house, whose “materialized ideology” would thus achieve greater impact with no additional expense. 103

The shift from larger numbers of smaller wine vessels to pairs of two large hu in vessel

assemblages would both have accommodated the service of larger numbers of participants and

allowed central control of the amount of liquor distributed. This was probably necessary in order

to accommodate greater numbers of high-ranking elites with claim to the privilege of attendance

at ritual events, as indicated by the apparent expansion of lineage identities over the course of the

period. Using a single, central set of bronze liquor vessels would have conserved resources at

lineage events, in terms not so much of amounts of food as of the amount of bronze needed to

101 Exceptions exist, most notably the famous inscription of the Shi Qiang pan (10175), which offers a detailed history of its commissioner’s lineage; see Sources , 183-92; Falkenhausen, Chinese Society , 55-6. As a pan -basin, however, that vessel was intended for a very different purpose than the ding and gui normally found in late Western Zhou sets; see for example Chinese Society , 342. 102 See note 43. Falkenhausen plausibly connects the differentiating function of vessel sets with demographic expansion and accompanying “lineage splitting” in Chinese Society , 67-70, 404-6. 103 On “materialized ideology,” see the discussion of DeMarrais, Castillo, and Earle in the introduction.

331

support lineage ritual. This in turn suggests the need to include elites who were not expected to

furnish their own bronze vessels; the expansion of lineages had probably produced many such

elites. The model of centralized service of liquor at ritual events would have created an

additional opportunity for differentiation between participants able and unable (whether due to

lack of wealth or lack of privilege) to furnish the liquor vessels used.

Changes in the ornamentation of vessels supported these efforts. It has been suggested that

they indicated a division of attendees between a core group of participants and an audience who

could look at the vessels from afar and see them as manifestations of the power of the lineage

and their individual donor. 104 This would have created a corresponding distinction between more and less privileged classes of attendees.

The institution of musical performances as a common element of Zhou elite ritual may have been its own reward; still, it offered certain advantages in the disposition of resources. Creating sets of bells allowed an initial investment to yield a potentially unlimited ongoing return in terms of offerings to the ancestors. 105 The playing of music would also have created an offering in

which all attendees could simultaneously partake, regardless of differential access to food and

liquor; assuming an expanded ritual audience, the savings of time would potentially have been

great. Finally, the possibility of casting a bell set created the opportunity for an investment of

unparalleled scale in the material basis of the ancestral cult. Few commissioners could have

mustered the resources to support the casting of a set of bells; they would have served as yet

another venue for differentiation based on wealth and access to the cultural resource of expertise

in music.

104 Rawson, “Statesmen or Barbarians?”, 89-91. Falkenhausen refers to the Dionysian vs. Apollonian dichotomy as formulated by Nietszche, which has this idea as one of its facets; see Chinese Society , 48-9; Douglas Smith, tr. Friedrich Nietszche, The Birth of Tragedy , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 105 Some ongoing investment would of course still have been necessary to support musicians.

332

Both the inscriptions and the corpus of Western Zhou vessels in general, then, portray a concerted movement over the course of the post-King Mu reigns toward ritual techniques affording more centralized control over the distribution of resources, naturalization of authority, and, in particular, institutionalized, ritual mechanisms of differentiation between elites. For the royal house, this involved a casting off of many prior techniques, particularly ancestral offerings of Shang provenance, in favor of others introduced as the expansion of the Zhou state ground to a halt. Both the bronzes and their inscriptions, however, make it clear that ancestral devotions continued to play a vital role in the lives of non-royal elites. The phenomena referred to as the

“ritual reform” or “ritual revolution” reflect related changes in those devotions.

The appearance of a new vocabulary of ancestral offerings in the late Western Zhou inscriptions suggests that the elimination of ancestral offerings from royal ritual assemblies opened the way for new developments in ancestral ritual at the non-royal level. The fact that this divergence happened late in the period, well after high-profile royal ancestral offerings no longer appear in the inscriptions, would seem to argue for a centralized imposition of standards for lineage ritual during the latter half of the middle Western Zhou. Combined with the relative completeness of the changes in the archaeological record observed by Rawson, this suggests that the changes in the royal ritual program – reflected in the inscriptions – and those in lineage ritual

– reflected in the archaeological corpus of bronzes – together formed a coherent royal program of reform of elite ritual to better maintain the Zhou collective in the face of the new sociopolitical realities of the post-King Mu period.

5.5: Conclusion

The changes seen in Zhou ritual over time, as portrayed in the bronze inscriptions, were

333 closely related to the evolving military and political fortunes of the Zhou royal house. Early

Western Zhou ritual assemblies leveraged the Zhou kings’ familiarity with ritual techniques of

Shang provenance to create compressed narratives of enrollment in the formative Zhou state identity. Events combining ancestral offerings with patronage rites and, in particular, the “Great

Rite” figured the Zhou king as leader of a military coalition and paragon performer of the patrilineal-ancestral ritual that was a basic element of the shared identity of Zhou elites. This participatory model of ritual complemented the political strategy of the royal house during the early Western Zhou expansion, when the kings frequently delegated authority over far-flung, conquered territories to relatives and affiliate elites.

As the period progressed and elite demographics expanded, the royal house moved toward new techniques creating better opportunities for differentiation within, rather than enrollment into, the Zhou elite group identity. The crisis in royal power following the death of King Zhao and the failure of Zhou expansion occasioned a backslide in the royal implementation of ritual during King Mu’s reign, as the king sought new ways to shore up the power of the royal house.

In the subsequent reigns, however, any revivalist tendencies in royal ritual were dispensed with, in favor of a strict program of institutionalized distribution of prestige and status, figuration of the king as a necessary element of the well-being of the state, and competition and differentiation between Zhou elites. Certain facets of this program’s effects in the realm of ancestral-lineage ritual survive in the archaeological record as the “ritual reform.”

This close correlation between political circumstances and royal ritual techniques is no surprise, as no effective distinction can be made between the ritual and political activity of the

Western Zhou. The consistent use of ritual event assemblies to political ends by the Zhou kings is well documented in the inscriptions. The sources make clear, however, that ancestral ritual

334 was a matter of concern to Zhou elites well after its disappearance from the record of royal ritual events. Why the Zhou kings abandoned the public performance of their own ancestral devotions when such acts still held relevance for non-royal elites is a question that deserves further investigation. That they did, however, allowed for later developments in the characterization of non-royal ancestral ritual that had a profound effect on later characterizations of the rites of Zhou.

335

CONCLUSION

The Western Zhou period occupies a special place in the history of China. Though many of the cultural techniques that the Zhou royal house possessed – writing, ancestral ritual, and, potentially, the production of bronze vessels – were derived from their Shang predecessors, the

Zhou kings used them more efficiently and in new combinations, spreading the common cultural identity that they supported across most of north China. In a very real sense, the formation of the

Zhou state was the beginning of China as a coherent nation, as the title of Creel’s early work on the Western Zhou period expressed. 106 Its accomplishment depended in large part on the

familiarity of the Zhou kings with Shang-style ritual, which allowed them to supplement their

military endeavors with materializations of ideology designed to perpetuate the relationships on

which the conquest coalition was built. Early Chinese scholars recalled the deft use of ritual in

the formation of the Zhou state and the Zhou elite identity; Confucius expressed this clearly with

his declaration that in matters of ritual, “I follow the Zhou.” 107

This work has explored in detail the role played by ritual, and by royal ritual in particular,

in the creation and conveyance of the associations that made up the Zhou state and the Zhou elite

identity. Royal implementations of ritual techniques evolved in concert with the changing

geopolitical concerns and strategies of the royal house, progressing generally from a focus on

enrollment of elites in the Zhou state project to one with internal differentiation of participants in

the Zhou elite identity and intensification of royal control over the core operations and resources

of the state. As the period progressed, effective use of ritual required a balancing act between

the intensifying concern of Zhou elites with ancestral lineage identity and the need of the royal

106 See Herrlee G. Creel, The Origins of Statecraft in China, Vol. 1: The Western Zhou Empire , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970. 107 Lunyu , “Ba yi” 14; Shisanjing zhushu , 2467.

336

house for new techniques of patronage, differentiation between supporters, control of resources,

and figuration of royal authority. Sweeping changes in both the inscriptional and archaeological

evidence for Western Zhou ritual dating to after the reign of King Mu – including the “ritual

revolution” alternately proposed for the reigns of Kings Yih-Yi and King Li – sought to fulfill

both of those concerns. The ritual practices of the late Western Zhou thus truly followed a

pendulum track between kin and king.

The strength of the cultural legacy of Western Zhou ritual was such that later thinkers of

the early period invested enormous time and resources in attempts to recreate it, of which the

Zhouli was simply the most comprehensive. These efforts dominated later understandings of

Western Zhou ritual until the rise of modern archaeology provided, in the corpus of inscribed

bronzes, a new pool of data for the investigation of Western Zhou ritual practices. 108 This work

has attempted a comprehensive review of the evidence in that pool of data concerning ritual

practices. It is my hope that the observations it presents allow for a clearer, more detailed, and

more contemporary understanding of the role played by Western Zhou ritual techniques in the

formation of elite identity; their close relationship with the geopolitical circumstances of the

royal house; and their connections to the ritual practices of the subsequent era.

This work has attempted a comprehensive review of the evidence in Western Zhou bronze inscriptions concerning ritual practices. As with most attempts to be comprehensive, it has undoubtedly glossed over some points, elided others, and stopped short of pushing still others to their logical conclusions. It cannot even hope to be thorough, because the rate of new discoveries in early China studies is such that vital new evidence will no doubt have emerged by

108 Inscribed bronzes have of course been found and catalogued in some quantity for a thousand years. The archaeological efforts of the twentieth century have, however, furnished a much larger pool of vessels and inscriptions for consideration, and the techniques of modern archaeology, in conjunction with paleographical studies, have driven significant advances in the relative dating of Western Zhou vessels. For more on this point, see Shaughnessy, Sources , 17-8, 106-55.

337 the time this work is read. I cannot apologize for these shortcomings; they are the nature of the beast. My main hopes are that the work introduces Western Zhou ritual to a broader audience, perhaps one familiar with the period mainly from Eastern Zhou and Han sources, as I was before

I began the training that led to this study; and that it succeeds in providing both pre-Qin specialists and non-China scholars with a useful springboard for further specialized inquiry on early Chinese ritual. In that hope, I would like to close with a few suggestions for future research building on the foundation established here.

The findings of this analysis have tended to confirm the idea of the “ritual revolution” in the formulation put forth by Jessica Rawson based on art-historical observations; further, they have tied that set of changes to the geopolitical specifics of the middle Western Zhou period.

This has created a point of contact between the visions of Western Zhou ritual presented in textual and archaeological sources. Further work may link that point of contact with textual materials known from both the received record and from excavated manuscripts; in particular, the portions of the Tsinghua slips dealing with Western Zhou events may prove fruitful ground for inquiry. Comparing the chronology of Zhou ritual strategies put forth here with those put forth in received and excavated texts will, I hope, improve our overall understanding of the pre-

Qin textual corpus.

New ritual terms that emerged in the bronze inscriptions in the wake of the middle

Western Zhou suggest a break between official royal ritual and the practices of non-royal elites.

These terms contributed significantly to later textual characterizations of Zhou ritual. With detailed study on Spring and Autumn sources, excavated materials of Warring States, Qin, and

Han date, and the Sanli , it may one day be possible to characterize in greater detail the

338

transmission of historical traditions about Western Zhou ritual and their relationships to the

emergent regional identities of the Spring and Autumn period.

The above discussion has observed the vital importance of the “ethic of presence” to the

action of Western Zhou inscribed ritual bronzes as social mediators, focusing especially on the

role of bronzes in bringing the distributed presence of the king into play in lineage cult activities.

In doing so, it has skirted the issue of the personal relationships of Zhou elites with the bronzes they produced for use in lineage ritual. To take the lineage as a basic scale of inquiry is to elide the fact that a lineage, like any other group, is “star-shaped,” in Latour’s terms; it is made of chronologically situated associations between disparate elements, including humans, objects, and places, each of which itself shares associations with entities dispersed throughout time and space. 109 Inscribed bronzes brought the presence of the king and other elite patrons into the

lineage cult, but only through the mediation of the elites who produced them and of whom, in a

very real sense, they were embodiments, materializations. In the context of ancestral offerings,

inscribed bronzes, and by extension the elites they embodied, truly stood “between kin and king.”

Further theoretical consideration of the deposition of bronzes in the archaeological record, their

combination into assemblages, and the messages, verbal and otherwise, that they conveyed will

clarify their relationships with the individuals who produced them, casting light in turn on the

role of standardized bronze sets in later ritual instantiations of Zhou elite identity.

109 See Reassembling the Social , 204-5. 208-9, 212-3, 217.

339

APPENDIX 1 ADDITIONAL TERMS

7.1: Introduction

This Appendix contains a discussion of two terms (guan 祼 and chai 祡) that are

substantially ambiguous of reading and interpretation, but have important implications for the

understanding of Western Zhou ritual as portrayed in the bronze inscriptions. I present a

consideration of these terms here both in the interest of completeness and as important

background for the interpretation of certain key inscriptions and/or terms discussed above.

7.2: The question of guan 祼 (libation/toasting)

The inscriptions of the Yuzu Ding you 毓祖丁卣 (5396), a late Shang bronze; the Wo

ding ; the He zun ; and the De fangding (2661) share a character depicting hands lifting up what

appears to be a liquor vessel before an altar (fig. 7.1, Appendix 2). The Wo ding case is unclear,

but it seems to indicate an object given to the vessel commissioner by the king along with a gift

of five strings of cowries. The other cases may well refer to actions:

辛亥王才（在）廙，降令曰：歸于我多高処（處）、山。。。1 On the xinhai day, the king was at Guang. [He] sent down a command saying, “Return [i.e., offer] X? to our many high places and mountains…” (Yuzu Ding you 毓祖丁卣 [5396])

隹王初  宅于成周，復爯 （武）王豐，自天… It was when the king first moved his dwelling to Chengzhou, repeated the rite of King Wu, and performed X? from [i.e., starting with?] Heaven… (He zun [6014])

1 My punctuation and reading of this inscription differs somewhat from that given in the AS database. That source places a break between gao 高 and jiu 処, in which case “Jiushan” 処山 would likely be the name of the recipient of the gift detailed in the next part of the inscription. I differ also in taking jiu here as standing for chu 處, “place” or “to stop/dwell at,” a reading followed by the AS database in its transcription of the later Ejun Qi chejie 鄂君啟車節 (12110).

340

隹（唯）三月王才（在）成周，（延） 自（鎬），咸。王易（賜）德貝廿朋，用乍（作）寶彝。 It was the third month; the king was at Chengzhou. [He] extended the X? of King Wu from the city of Hao. When it was completed, the king awarded De twenty strings of cowries, with which he makes a precious, revered vessel. (De fangding 德方鼎 [2661])

This character is the root of an ongoing debate in the study of early Chinese inscriptions. The

AS database identifies these, as well as several other similar but not identical characters, as the

term guan 祼, referring according to its Shuowen entry to the pouring of a libation (fig. 7.1). 2

Some scholars, however, read the character fu 福, with the probable meaning of “allotments of sacrificial meat,” in place of the guan 祼 offered by the AS transcription of the He zun and, in at least one case, the De fangding. 3 The occurrence of another, clearer form of fu would seem to

complicate that reading. 4

I am inclined to read the character in the He zun inscription, as well as in many of the cases

that the AS database transcribes as guan 祼, as referring to a ceremonial pouring or presentation

of liquor. The clearest evidence for that comes from the inscriptions of the Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎

(2839) and the Ehou Yufang ding , the former dating to the reign of King Kang, the latter to the late Western Zhou. 5 The Xiao Yu ding inscription gives a detailed, step-by-step description of a

2 Shuowen , 6. 3 See Tang Lan, “He zun mingwen jieshi,” Wenwu 1976.1, 60-3, esp. 60; Li Xueqin, “He zun xin shi,” Zhongyuan wenwu 1981.1, 35-45, esp. 35; MWX, 20-1, n. 2. Li Xueqin reads the He zun inscription in conjunction with that of the De fangding. Holding that the two inscriptions refer to the same event, Li draws the conclusion that the use of fu indicates the receipt of sacrificial meat apportioned from offerings made to King Wu at the western capital Hao; he correspondingly takes the feng here as li 醴, “sweet wine/sacrificial wine,“ an established reading in the Western Zhou inscriptions. See Li Xueqin, “He zun xin shi,” 36-7; for a case of feng commonly read as li in the inscriptions, see the Chang Xing he (9455), glossed as such by AS. Ma Chengyuan, on the other hand, reads the yan 延 in the De fangding inscription as meaning that the king continued a process of offerings that had been begun at Hao; he reads the character in question as a case of fu 福 referring to these offerings rather than to the meat itself. 4 See for example the inscriptions of the Shenzi Ta guigai 沈子它簋蓋 (4330) and the Qi you 啟卣 (5410). 5 The Xiao Yu ding is considered a dating standard for the reign of King Kang, based on its mention of the prior kings Wen (presumably, based on the position of the “Zhou King” in the list), Wu, and Cheng; see Sources, 110;

341 ritual event staged to honor an early Western Zhou military commander known as Yu 盂 after a victorious campaign against a population called the Guifang. 6 Liquor played an important role throughout the event, but especially in the second stage, the account of which app ears below:

…□ 咸，賓即立（位）、（瓚）賓。王乎（呼）（瓚）贊盂，（以）□ □ □ 進賓，□ □ 大采，三周入服酉（酒）。王各（廟），祝。（延）□ □ 邦賓，不（丕） （祼），□□ 用牲啻7（禘）周王、武王、成王，□ □ 卜有臧，王（祼），（祼）述，（瓚）王邦賓。王乎（呼）□ □ 令盂（以）區入，凡區（以）品。若 （翌）乙酉，□三事大夫入服酉（酒）。王各（廟），（瓚）王邦賓。王令賞盂，□ □ □ □ □ 弓一、矢百、畫一、貝胄一、金毌（盾）一、戈 □ □ □ □，用作 □ 白（伯）寶彝。隹（唯）王廿又五祀…8 …When…was finished, the guests took up their places. The guests were encouraged to drink. 9 The king called for Yu to be urged to drink, 10 using…approached the guests… At the hour of “Great Allotment,” 11 the three Zhou entered and did service with liquor. 12 The king entered…Temple and performed a zhu-invocation. Reaching…the guests of the states, greatly poured libations ( guan )13 …used a sacrificial victim in di -offering to the Zhou King, King Wu, and King Cheng,…divination was auspicious. 14 The king poured a libation (guan ). Having performed libations ( guan ), 15 the King and the guests of the states were

MWX, 41; Landscape and Power , 127, n. 98. On the dating of the Ehou Yufang ding , see the discussion of that vessel in chapter 4 of this work. 6 The Shang also had a history of conflict with the Guifang, who probably occupied part of nort hern Shaanxi province and may have been related to the Ordos bronze -producing culture; for a summary of the available evidence on this point, see Landscape and Power , 54-5. 7 I follow MWX , 42, in reading chi 啻 here, and have adjusted the transcription acco rdingly. 8 I have substituted the character 嘼 for the corresponding AS font character in this inscription. 9 Following Ma in interpreting zan 贊 here as “to urge to drink”; see MWX , 43, n. 19. 10 See the previous note. 11 Following MWX in reading da cai 大采 as the name of a specific time of day; see ibid., n. 20. 12 The identity of the “Three Zhou” is problematic; the phrase appears nowhere else in the body of inscriptions contained in the AS database. MWX leaves the character here rendered zhou 周 untranscribed; see p. 41. 13 Ma reads this character here as lu 盧, which he interprets as the name of an offering; see MWX , 43, n. 22. It is, however, clearly akin to many other cases of guan in the Western Zhou inscriptions (see Table 7.1). 14 MWX does not attempt to ide ntify the characters rendered in the AS transcription as bu you zang 卜有臧; see p. 42. 15 MWX follows the Shuowen in reading shu 述 here as xun 循, indicating that the libation occurred “in compliance with the rites”; see MWX , 43, n. 24. I suspect the characte r may instead have been sui 遂, meaning “then.” The forms are orthographically similar; compare shu in the hand transcription of the Xiao Yu ding inscription with sui in the inscription of the Zhabo ding 柞伯鼎 [NA0076] . The AS database transcription read s a case of shu as sui in the inscription of the Jinhou Su zhong 晉侯 鐘 (NA0878).

342

urged to drink. 16 The king called on…to order Yu to bring in the captured items, all items [entering] type by type... 17

In this inscription, the character in question forms part of a ritual sequence including livestock sacrifice to the ancestors, crack-divination, and substantial consumption of liquor. Its position relative to the phrase bang bin 邦宾, “the guests of the states,” suggests that it involved acknowledging living attendees in some form; given that its second occurrence appears immediately before a reciprocal toast between the king and his noble guests, it is quite likely that the acknowledgement in question included or was related to the toasting process. Its connection with the term zan 贊, here taken as the action of urging someone to drink, further supports the

idea that guan involved the use of liquor.18

The relevant portion of the Ehou Yufang ding inscription leaves little doubt that the case

of the character it includes referred to an action of ceremonial recognition involving liquor:

…噩（鄂）侯（馭）方內（納）壺于王，乃（祼）之。（馭）方（侑）王… …The Marquis of E, the Border Protector, 19 presented a hu -vessel 20 to the king and then performed guan -libation [toward him]. 21 The Border Protector toasted(?) the king…22

16 The sense of this, I believe, is that they mutually exchanged toasts. For the connection between zan and chou 酬, see MWX , 43, n. 19. 17 Following MWX , 43, n. 25, in taking qu 區 as ou 毆, meaning “captured items,” and pin 品 as referring to the division of the items by type. 18 See note 9. 19 I follow Li Feng in translating the title yufang as Border Protector. See “Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders,” 222-3; see also Xia Hanyi, “Shi Yufang,” 97-109. 20 While the AS database, along with Liu Yu, reads the character here as hu 壶, many scholars, including Chen Mengjia, Shirakawa, and Ma Chengyuan, take it as feng 豐, representing the character li 醴, meaning “drinking” or “sweet wine.” See Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115; Duandai , 217; Shirakawa 142, 264; MWX , 281. My sense is that the relatively simple character appearing in this inscription is more readily identifiable with hu (taken here from the Zuo Lü hu 作旅壺 [9519]) than with the relatively complicated feng (several examples of which appear in chapter 3, fig. 3.1). 21 Duandai , p. 218, and Shirakawa 142, 264, agree with AS in reading this character as guan 祼. In this regard, Duandai follows Wang Guowei, “Shi ‘you,.” Liu Yu, “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de sheli,” 1115, and MWX , 281, refrain from identifying the character, though Ma’s explanation of the clause implies a definition of yin 飲, “to drink.” 22 The character here rendered you 侑 is sometimes given as you 宥 (see Duandai 154, 217-8; Wang Guowei, “Shi

343

In this passage, the character in question clearly takes the pronoun zhi 之 as its object, requiring

that it must be a verb; the king is the most likely antecedent for the zhi in question.. That the

Marquis performed this action immediately after presenting the king with a liquor vessel strongly suggests that the liquor played a role in it.

With these cases, one early and one late, as precedent, there is justification for reading the character forms in question as a ceremonial acknowledgement involving liquor; this conforms with the gloss of guan 祼 in the Shuowen , though the character forms are not precisely equivalent. 23 That reading probably held true for the inscriptions that begin this section, as well

as for the many occurrences of similar characters in the Shang oracle bones. 24 The inscriptions

‘you,’” 5.); Some scholars feel that it indicates that the Marquis of E toasted the king (see Wang Guowei, “Shi ‘you,’”, 6; Duandai 154, 217). Shirakawa suggests that it meant “to present”; see 142, 264. MWX , 281, identifies it as 侑 and glosses it as bao 報, “to repay,” based on the “Shi gu” chapter of the Erya . I have tentatively followed the first reading here. 23 Many of the cases in question contain the graphic element (fig. 7.1). However, one apparently clear-cut case of the character guo 果 is known from the Western Zhou inscriptions; see the inscription of the Guo gui 果簋 (3474). The form of that character is similar to but clearly distinct from the elements found in the cases under consideration. 24 For examples of relatively clear cases of the character in the OBI, see H00719r, H22630, and H41173, among many others. It is of note that the CHANT database distinguishes the character forms 1093C-E, which depict hands lifting up the vessel (as in, for example, character 1093E [ò], the closest to the bronze forms under consideration here), from the series of forms (designated 1092, H1092A, 1093, 1093A, and 1093B) in which no hands appear. CHANT provides a custom transliteration for the former, while it transcribes the latter as fu 福, or, in cases in which the altar radical is absent, as the element 畐. This distinction is not observed in JGWZGL , which groups all of these characters together under entry no. 1123. That source rejects the fu transcription and favors the use of guan , but refrains from making a definite identification; see pp. 1072-8. (The above images of bronze characters are derived from CHANT and its accompanying fonts; see http://www.chant.org.) It should be noted that, based solely on syntax, the Xiao Yu ding and Ehou Yufang ding cases of the character may have taken living humans as targets – the king in the latter case, and either the king, the guests, or both in the former. It is therefore theoretically possible that the inclusion of the altar radical shi 示 in the character, as in the OBI examples and the Yuzu Ding you , Wo ding , He zun , and De fangding cases, differentiated the action’s use as an ancestral offering (or, in the Yuzu Ding you case, an offering toward natural spirits) from its use toward living humans. Since the Xiao Yu ding cases are vague, however, and since the Wo ding case probably refers to an object, I am inclined to view the loss or replacement of the altar radical as an evolution of the character rather than a systematically applied distinction.

344

of the Shou Gong pan 守宮盤 (10168) and the two Bu Zhi ding 不栺鼎 (2735-6), both of middle

Western Zhou date, contain further cases. 25

There are, however, several cases in which the term apparently refers to a valuable object,

usually one given as a gift. The Wo ding has already been mentioned; the Geng Ying ding 庚應

鼎 (2748) and Maogong ding 毛公鼎 (2841) inscriptions provide early and late Western Zhou examples: 26

…丁巳，王蔑庚嬴厤，易（錫）（祼）、（璋）、貝十朋… …On the day dingsi , the king performed mieli for Geng Ying, giving her a guan , a zhang - jade, and ten strings of cowries... (Geng Ying ding 庚應鼎 [2748]) 27

…易（賜）女（汝）秬鬯一卣、（祼）、圭、（瓚）寶、朱巿（芾）… …[I] award you one you -urn of dark liquor, a guan , a jade gui -tablet, a zan-libation cup jewel, a red kneepad… (Maogong ding 毛公鼎 [2841]) 28

Further examples appear in inscriptions dating to throughout the Western Zhou period. 29 The

Rong gui 榮簋 (4121), in particular, pairs the character with zan 瓚 in such a way as to make it

difficult to determine the grammatical role of the latter:

25 The AS database dates all of these bronzes to the middle Western Zhou. The Bu Zhi ding probably date to the reign of King Mu; see the discussion of the two Bu Zhi ding in chapter 2. The Shou Gong pan is another middle Western Zhou bronze. MWX, 181, dates it to King Yi, as do Daxi , vol. 3, 93, and Duandai , 185-7; see also Sackler , 723, and Shirakawa 21.119, 495-507. The Wan zhi 萬觶 (6515), another middle Western Zhou bronze per the AS database (though Duandai , p. 127, assigns it to King Kang), contains a possible additional example; however, the unusual syntax of that inscription makes it difficult to determine the grammatical role of the character therein. 26 The Geng Ying ding was probably produced under King Kang; see MWX , 36; Daxi, vol. 3, 43-5. The Maogong ding is generally considered a King Xuan-era bronze; see Daxi , vol. 3, 134-9; MWX , pp. 316-9; Shirakawa 30.181, 637-87; Bureaucracy, 85. 27 On the likelihood that Geng Ying was female, see the discussion of mieli in chapter 4. 28 The punctuation of this passage given here differs from that in the AS database inscription, wherein no serial comma is placed between guan 祼 and gui 圭. 29 Specifically, the Shi Shou ding 史獸鼎 (2778), the Rong gui 榮簋 (4121), the Xian gui 鮮簋 (10166), and, potentially, the Guan yi 匜 (10177) (fig. 7.1). The Shi Shou ding is an early Western Zhou bronze dating probably to King Cheng or King Kang; see MWX 134, 90; Duandai , 2, 90; Shirakawa 7.33, 366-72. The Rong gui dates to the early Western Zhou, and probably to King Kang; see Duandai , 126-7; Shirakawa 11.59, 591-607; Sackler , 420. The Xian gui is a dating standard for King Mu by virtue of its description of an ancestral rite for

345

…王休易（賜）（厥）臣父 （瓚）王、貝百朋… …The king beneficently gave his servant Father Rong a guan for urging the king to drink (zan )30 and one hundred strings of cowries… (Rong gui 榮簋 [4121])

The characters zan wang guan 瓚王祼 may be read as a single phrase meaning “a guan for

urging the king to drink,” as above, or as two separate items (“a zan -libation cup and a royal

guan ), as in the Maogong ding inscription. Precisely what manner of object the character refers

to in these inscriptions is unclear; however, given its verbal uses and its close association with

the term zan 瓚, it likely referred to a personal liquor or fluid vessel of some sort. The labeling

of the Guan yi 匜(10177), with the single character  provides some anecdotal support.

The character complex transliterated in the AS database as guan includes some cases that referred definitively to objects and some that were unquestionably meant to describe a ritual action. There seems to have been some confusion even among the Western Zhou scribes as to the grammatical function of the character and of the related term zan . In combination with the

high level of morphological variance of the character, that has led to a diverse range of readings

throughout the corpus of inscriptions containing it. 31 Considering the above cases as a group reveals a coherent corpus of occurrences with substantial morphological and grammatical differences, but held together by a shared logic of use.

King Zhao; on this dating method, see Sources , 108. The AS database assigns the Guan yi to the late Western Zhou. The Guan yi inscription is a single character, making it difficult to judge whether it was meant as a noun or a verb. 30 I here take zan as referring to the act of urging someone to drink, as MWX proposes for its reading in the Xiao Yu ding inscription (see above). A figure called Rong plays an important role in the events recorded on the Xiao Yu ding ; it is possible that this was the same Rong and even that he had occasion to use the king’s gift in the drinking events recorded on the Xiao Yu ding . 31 To give an extreme example, Ma Chengyuan reads the character in the He zun inscription as fu 福, that in the Xiao Yu ding inscription as lü 慮, that in the Rong gui as jue 爵, and that in the Shou Gong pan case as guan 祼, while he transliterates the Ehou Yufang ding case with no gloss. See MWX , 20, 21, note 2; 43, note 22; 84, 85, note 1a; 181, note 1; 281, note 3.

346

The earliest uses of the character as a verb in the bronze inscriptions, those dating to the

late Shang or the reign of King Cheng, are consistent with its formulation as an offering to spirits,

in which vein it often appears in the Shang OBI. Later cases are less clear; the Xiao Yu ding

occurrences could either be offerings to spirits or recognitions of the living participants, while

the Ehou Yufang ding case quite likely took the king as its target. Though sparse, this trend is in

basic accord with the shifting of the bronze-inscriptional corpus away from records of ancestral-

ritual offerings over the course of the Western Zhou period, as detailed in chapter 5. However,

though it may have ceased to refer to such offerings, the term in question saw continued use as

both noun and verb throughout the Western Zhou period. To avoid shoehorning it into the

otherwise useful categories of “ancestral rites” or “rites of recognition,” I have therefore

presented it here.

7.3: Chai 髭/柴/祡

The inscription of the Da Yu ding 大盂鼎 (2837), an early Western Zhou vessel, 32 begins

with the narration of a royal warning against excessive drinking:

隹（唯）九月，王才（在）宗周，令盂。王若曰：「盂，不（丕）顯玟（文）王，受天有（佑）大令，在（武）王嗣玟（文）乍（作）邦，（闢）（厥）匿（慝），匍（敷）有四方，（畯）正（厥）民，在（于）（御）事，，酉（酒）無敢（酖），有髭（祡）（蒸）祀，無敢 （醻33 ）。古（故）天異（翼）臨子，（法）保先王，□ 有四方… It was the ninth month; the king was at Zongzhou. He commanded Yu, saying, “Yu, great and illustrious King Wen received the great command of Heaven’s blessing. When King Wu succeeded King Wen in setting up the states, he cut apart their ills, spread out and possessed the four directions, controlled and made upright their people; in the

32 Dating suggestions fall mostly into the reigns of King Cheng or King Kang, although Dong Zuobin dates the vessel to King Mu; see Shirakawa 2.61, 647. 33 I follow MWX ’s and JC ’s reading of  as chou 醻 (see JC 2837, MWX 62, 37-9, n. 8); I have altered the transcription accordingly. The translation follows this reading.

347

handling of affairs, ah! he did not dare to overindulge in drink, nor did he urge toasts when conducting the chai and zheng rites. Thus Heaven helped and looked down upon its children, molding and protecting the former kings, [spreading] out to possess the Four Directions…

In its explanation of King Wu’s restraint, the inscription’s recording of the royal command uses two specialized characters to describe his performance of ritual offerings (in addition to the more generic si 祀). One of those is readily identifiable as zheng 蒸, a term discussed in detail in

chapter 2. The other is the subject of some disagreement. MWX identifies the character in question as chai 祡, a term glossed in the Shuowen as “to burn firewood as an offering to

Heaven and/or the spirits”; according to the “Shun dian” chapter of the Shangshu , the ancient emperor Shun is supposed to have performed this offering upon his arrival at Mt. Tai. 34 JC makes the same identification, transcribing the character as zi 髭 and glossing that reading as

chai .35 Shirakawa, on the other hand, refrains from identifying the Da Yu ding character. 36

The association of chai , or, rather, of the related character chai 柴, with royal ritual

practices appears in all three of the major later ritual texts, the Sanli .37 The “Jin li” 覲禮 (“Royal

Audience”) chapter of the Yili states that the burning of firewood was practiced as an offering to

Heaven ( Tian 天), while the “Chun guan” 春官（“Spring Officials” ）chapter of the Zhouli assigns the national-level official known as the “Great Ancestral Elder” ( Da zongbo 大宗伯) responsibility for chai -offerings to the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies. 38 It is mentioned

34 Shuowen , 4; Shangshu , “Shun dian,” Shisanjing zhushu, 127. The Shuowen entry for the character assigns this phrase to the “Yu shu.” The character image here is after the AS database. 35 JC 2837; see above. 36 Shirakawa 2.61, 654-5, 673-4. 37 The Sanli does not contain the character chai 祡; instead, it consistently uses the character chai 柴 as both noun and verb. Context makes it clear that many uses of the second character in the Sanli accord with the Shuowen gloss of the first; I believe the two can be considered interchangeable. 38 Shisanjing zhushu , 757-8, 1094.

348

most often in the Liji , however, wherein its association with the royal house is strong. The king is said to perform a chai -offering before traveling to the four directions; to have offered chai at

Mount Dai during his eastward patrols; and to have commanded the Four Supervisors to provide firewood ( xin chai 薪柴) for liao -offerings. 39 Most notably for our purposes, the “Da zhuan” 大

傳 (“Great Account”) chapter of the Liji states that King Wu performed a chai -offering after his defeat of the Shang forces at Muye:

牧之野，武王之大事也。既事而退，柴於上帝，祈於社，設奠於牧室。遂率天下諸侯執豆、籩，逡奔走；追王大王亶父、王季歷、文王昌；不以卑臨尊也。

The field of Mu was the great affair of King Wu. When he had completed the affair and withdrawn, he performed a chai -offering to the High Lord (Shangdi), prayed at the altar of earth ( she 社), and set up libations ( dian ) at the Hall of Mu. He then led the many lords from across the world in taking up dou -vessels and bian -baskets, returning, and rushing about, following the king [in making offerings to] the Great King Danfu; Wang Ji, named Li; and King Wen, named Chang; he did not place the base near the exalted. 40

This assertion is echoed in the “Wu cheng” chapter of the Shangshu .41 Evidently, by the time of composition of these portions of the Yili and the Shangshu , there existed a tradition that

King Wu had performed a chai -rite as part of the ceremonies commemorating the conquest of the Shang. 42 Perhaps these passages in particular have inspired the reading of the character in

the Da Yu ding inscription as chai , given that term’s association with King Wu in the later texts.

39 Liji , “Jiao te sheng,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1450; “Wang zhi,” 1328; and “Yue ling,” 1384, respectively. The “Ji Fa” 祭法 (“Methods of Offerings”) chapter also contains a line stating that the burning of firewood ( fan chai 燔柴) was an offering made to Heaven; see Liji , “Jifa,” in Shisanjing zhushu, 1588. Some associate the term chai with the term liao 燎, presumably because they both involve burnt offerings; see Chen Mengjia, Guwenzi , 113-33, 138. Later in the chapter, I will discuss liao and will point out that, unlike chai , it was definitely used under the Western Zhou to denote a specific type of burnt offering. 40 Liji , “Da zhuan,” Shisanjing zhushu , 1506. 41 Shangshu , “Wu cheng,” Shisanjing zhushu , 184. 42 As one of the “old text” chapters, the “Wu cheng” chapter of the Shangshu is probably not of Western Zhou date; see Zhu Fenghan, Xian Qin shi yanjiu gaiyao , 41-2; Shaughnessy, “Shang shu,” in Loewe, Early Chinese Texts, pp. 376-80. Shaughnessy has argued that the “Shi fu” chapter of the Yizhoushu was in fact the work originally known under the name “Wu cheng” as part of the Yizhoushu ; see Before Confucius , 37-40. Given the commonalities in the “Wu cheng” account and the “Da zhuan” chapter of the Liji , it is likely that the two shared a

349

Verifying the Da Yu ding character as chai is difficult, as comparable examples are in short supply. The Jiaguwen heji editors find no examples of the character chai 祡 or its frequent

later substitute chai 柴, nor does the Jinwen gulin cite examples of either. 43 JC likewise identifies no further occurrences of the character in the bronze inscriptions. JC does, however, contain several other instances of zi 髭, all dating to the late Shang and used as name components; 44 Heji contains two cases of this character, glossed with the character form zi 頾.45

As noted in the Jiaguwenzi gulin , these other instances of zi lack the additional top component ci

此 shown in the Da Yu ding character and contained in the character s chai 祡 and chai 柴.46

Qiu Xigui interprets this as the addition of a phonetic component to clarify the identity of the

character as zi 髭.47

All told, we are left with no contemporary paleographic cases of the character chai 祡 or

chai 柴 to support its identification with the character zi 髭/頾; and no alternate examples of the

Da Yu ding character form to support its identification as zi 髭/頾 – especially notable given that all other occurrences thereof form parts of names, while the Da Yu ding character clearly does not. The identification of that character as chai , and the concomitant assertion that the

Zhou used the term chai to refer to a form of offering, thus rests on very shaky ground. Even if we do accept the gloss of the Da Yu ding character as chai , however, it will then be the earliest example of the (probable) use of that term to indicate a variety of offering, separated from its occurrences in the Sanli by a gap of several hundred years. Without further inscriptional

common source. 43 JGWZGL , JWGL . 44 See the Jing gui (3975), the Zi ding (1033), etc. 45 Heji H27740, H27742; see Jiaguwenzi gulin 258, 316. 46 See Shuowen , 4, 252. 47 Qiu Xigui, “Du Anyang xin chu de niujiagu ji qi keci,” Kaogu 1972.5, cited in JGWZGL , 316.

350

evidence, no more can be done than to note that later tradition used the term chai to refer to a

type of burnt offering often conducted by the king and generally targeted at the sky/Heaven ( tian

天), mountains, and other natural phenomena; but the contemporary Western Zhou sources cannot corroborate that chai was performed in this manner under the Zhou. I have therefore

listed it here in the Appendix rather than incorporating it into the main body of this work.

351

APPENDIX 2 TABLES

Table 0.1: The chronology of the Western Zhou kings1

PRE-CONQUEST King Wen 1099/56-1050 EARLY WESTERN ZHOU King Wu 1049/45-1043 Duke of Zhou 1042-1036 King Cheng 1042/35-1006 King Kang 1005/3-978 King Zhao 977/75-957 MIDDLE WESTERN ZHOU King Mu 956-918 King Gong 917/15-900 King Yih 899/97-873 King Xiao 872?-866 King Yi 865-858 LATE WESTERN ZHOU King Li 857/53-842/28 Gong He 841-828 King Xuan 827/25-782 King You 781-771

1 The dates given here follow those adopted in Shaughnessy, Sources , xix, and continued in Li Feng, Bureaucracy , xv. As in the latter work, periodization follows that of Chen Mengjia; see Duandai , 354, 491-524.

352

Table 1.1: Frequency of xing 姓姓姓 names in dateable Shang and Western Zhou bronze inscriptions (following the AS database) 1

Xing (Shang) Early Western Middle Late Western Total W. Zhou Western Zhou Zhou Zhou occurrences Ji 姬 0 14 33 74 121 Jiang 姜 0 11 24 43 78 Huai 媿 0 0 5 4 9 Ji 姞 0 7 8 22 37 Ren 妊 2 3` 5 7 15 Yun 妘 0 1 1 10 12 Ying 贏 0 1 2 0 3

1 The dates followed in this table are those given in the AS database as of the date of compilation (December 2008). Inscriptions dated to “early or middle Western Zhou,” to “middle or late Western Zhou,” or to “late Western Zhou or early Spring and Autumn” have not been included. “Individual occurrences” refers to uses of the term in a single sense in a single document; multiple occurrences of the same term of address within a single inscription are counted once, are as occurrences in duplicate or near-duplicate inscriptions.

Table 1.2: Western Zhou tombs with vessel assemblages from the Yu state cemetery at Baoji 1

Site Tomb Ding 鼎 Gui 簋 Yan 甗 Li 鬲 Zhi 觶 Other bronze vessels Ceramic vessels Total bronze Date per number vessels report

Yu state BZFM1 4 (1 square) 5 1 2 1 1 lei 15 guan (1 proto- 14 Cheng cemetery, (looted) 2 porcelain, 14 ceramic) Baoji, Shaanxi BZM1 5 3 1 jue , 1 pan 5 guan , 3 li 10 Kang

BZM2 7 guan 0 Zhao-Mu

BZM3 1 1 20 guan 2 Cheng- Kang

BZM4 4 (1 square) 2 (main), 1 1 1 (main), 2 2 (main), 1 1 zun , 1 you , 1 jue , 1 dou , 1 hu, 4 guan , 1 bei (cup), 1 16 (main), 7 Zhao (main), 3 (accomp.) (main) (accomp.) (accomp.) 1 pan (main) he (accomp.) (accomp.) BZM5 8 guan 0 Mu-Gong

BZM6 6 guan 0 Cheng- Kang

BZM7 3 (main), 1 2 (main), 1 1 (main), 1 2 zun , 2 you , 2 gu , 1 dou 9 guan , 1 lei 13 (main), 4 Kang- (accomp.) (acomp.) (accomp.) (main), 1 lei , (accomp.) Zhao

BZM8 1 1 1 1 zun , 2 you , 1 jue 5 guan 7 Cheng- Kang

BZM9 3 2 2 2 li , 1 guan , 1 dou 4 Mu-Gong

BZM10 4 guan 0 Cheng- Kang

BZM11 1 5 guan 1 Cheng- Kang

BZM12 6 guan 0 Mu or earlier 4

1 These data are gathered from Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng, Baoji Yu guo mudi , 2 vols., Beijing: Wenwu, 1988. 2 Baoji Yu guo mudi , 41. 3 The excavators note that one ding and both gui from this tomb were made of tin ( xi 锡); see ibid., 468. 353 4

The excavators date this tomb relative to BZM5 and BZM9, which they assign to the period of Kings Mu-Gong; see ibid., 269.

BZM13 7 (2 square) 3 (main), 1 1 1 (main) 1 dou , 1 zun , 2 you , 1 jue , 1 gu , 6 guan 22 (main), 3 Kang (main), 2 (accomp.) (main) 1 dou -ladle, 1 he , 1 hu , 1 pan (accomp.) (accomp.) (main) BZM14 1 1 6 guan 2 Wu, Cheng, Kang BZM15 0 Cheng- Kang

BZM16 0 Cheng- Kang

BZM17 1 3 guan 1 Zhao-Mu

BZM18 1 1 5 guan 2 Cheng- Kang

BZM19 1 1 4 guan 2 Wu, Cheng, Kang BZM20 2 2 1 he -box 5 guan 5 Wu, Cheng, Kang BZM21 5 guan 0 Cheng- Kang BZM22 1 guan 0 Cheng- Kang BRM1 甲 5 4 9 Mu

BRM 乙 8 (3 square) 5 1 2 1 4 dou , 2 niaozun , 1 xiangzun , 2 9 ceramic guan , 1 36 Mu zun (round), 1 you , 1 lei , 2 jue , proto-porcelain guan , 2 1 dou -ladle, 2 hu , 2 pan , 1 gai - proto-porcelain dou lid BRM2 6 (1 square) 5 1 3 2 dou , 2 he , 1 pan , 1 yu 8 guan 21 Mu

BRM3 5 0

BRM4 5 guan 0

5 The situation of BRM3 is quite unusual, in that it is very large, but contains almost no grave goods, and its occupant shows signs of having been strangled to 354

death; see ibid., 385-6. It is included here for completeness’s sake, but it should not be taken as a useful example of elite burial assemblages.

Table 2.1: Vessels declaring hui ȼ as a purpose 6

Vessel name Vessel date Alternate Performed at Target Blessings entreated Place of discovery (following the performer the behest of (following the AS AS database) database) Ji Xin zun 季 Early Western “Good fortune” ( fu 福) Liujiacun, Fufeng county, Zhou Shaaanxi 尊 (5940) Bo Hu gui 伯 Early Western “His august deceased father” ( jue huang kao 厥皇考)? “Ten thousand years” ( wan nian Zhou 萬年 簋 (4073) ) Shi Chen ding Early Western 事晨鼎 (2575) Zhou Wei ding 衛 Middle Western Ji Zhong 己仲, Wei’s deceased father? (vessel dedicatee) “Longevity” ( shou 壽) 鼎 (2733) Zhou 高祖辛公壽 Xing zhong  Middle Western "High Ancestor Duke Xin" ( gao zu Xingong ), “Longevity” ( shou ) Zhuangbaicun, Fufeng Zhou 文祖乙公 county, Shaanxi 鐘 (246) "Cultured Ancestor Duke Yi" ( wen zu Yigong ), "august deceased father Duke Ding ( huang kao Dinggong 皇考丁公), "the prior cultured men" ( qian wen ren 前文人) (?) Yi zhi 觶 Middle Western "That the generations of [my] Zhou descendants should not dare to (6516) slacken" ( shi zisun bu gan chi 世子孫不敢弛) Bo Jifu gui 伯 Middle Western Qiangjiacun, Fufeng 幾父簋 (3765- Zhou county, Shaanxi 6) Du Bo xu (gai ) Late Western "The august spirits of [his] deceased father and grandfathers" “Longevity” ( shou ) On the border between 杜伯盨(蓋) Zhou (huang shen zu kao 皇神祖考)? Hancheng and (4448-52) Chengcheng, Shaanxi (4448) Hu gui 簋 Late Western “Longevity” ( shou ) Qicun, Fufeng county, Zhou Shaanxi (4317)

6 Vessel dates and places of discovery in this chart follow the AS database. Entries under “Target” marked with question marks are mentioned in the inscription, 355

but do not act as the grammatical object of the verb hui.

Table 4.1: Instances of mieli in early Western Zhou inscriptions

Vessel Location Venue Chief Target Performed Gifts Other Other people Other important name performer on behalf of ceremonies events

Bao you Zhou 周? The king Bao 保 “Treasure” ( bao 寶) “Offerings” "The five marquises of the The king orders Bao (5415), Bao (si 祀) eastern states of Yin" ( Yin dong to travel to the zun (6003) guo wu hou 殷東國五侯); the Six eastern portions of Types ( liu pin 六品 (per MWX, p. the former Yin 23, n. 2); "the [representatives of sphere of influence the] four directions" ( si fang 四 and eliminate the people of the Six 方)? (following MWX , p. 23, n. 6) Types

Tian Wang [Pangjing?] The king? "I" (yu 于) Feng /li 豐/ King Wen ( Wen Wang 文王); the gui 天亡簋 (i.e., Tian 禮; High Lord ( Shang Di 上帝); the 1 (4261) Wang 天亡) "offerings" Yin kings ( Yin wang 殷王) (si 祀)

Geng Ying Geng Ying's The king Geng Ying Cowries (ten strings); you 庚贏卣 palace/office 庚嬴 cinnabar (one tube) (5426) (Geng Ying (dan yi gan? 丹一庚贏宮 gong ) ) (following MWX , p. 37, n. 2, in reading  as a loan for guan 管, “tube”)

Geng Ying The Zhou The king Geng Ying A zhang -jade 璋, a The king enters the ding 庚嬴 Palace 庚嬴 guan -cup 祼 (MWX Zhou Palace for 鼎 (2748) (Zhougong 琱 reads this character as "great affairs" ( yishi 衣事 2 宮)? jue 爵; see MWX , p. ) 37), cowries (ten strings)

Yu gui 敔 Zhou The Great Hall The king Yu 敔 A dark jacket and a 簋 (4166) (Taishi 太室) red robe ( xuan yi chi gun 玄衣赤袞)

Yu ding 寓 Pangjing? The king Document The great Unclear The great men ( da ren 大人) The king sends Yu to 鼎 (2756) Maker Yu men ( da ren assist the great men (Zuoce Yu 大人)? (da ren 大人) 作册寓)

1 This inscription uses the term mie 蔑 by itself, without li 歷; the situation generally accords with the use of mieli in other inscriptions. 356 2 殷

Following MWX in reading yi as yin ; see p. 37, n. 2.

Xiaochen The Mu Elder Father Petty The king Cowries The Eastern Yi ( Dong Yi 東夷); Elder Father Mao Lai gui 小 Encampment Mao ( Bo Minister Lai the Eight Armies of Yin ( Yin Ba leads the Eight 臣逨簋 (Mu Shi 牧師) Maofu 伯懋 (Xiaochen Shi 殷八師); "the armies" ( shi 師) Armies of Yin on a (4238-9) 父)? Lai 小臣逨) campaign against the Eastern Yi people

Jing you 競 Pi 坯 "The bureau" Elder Father Jing 競 A zhang -jade 璋 The Cheng Armies ( Cheng shi 成 Bo Xinfu takes the 卣 (5425) (guan 官) Xi ( Bo Xifu 師); the Southern Yi ( Nan Yi 南 Cheng Armies 伯屖父 ) 夷) eastward to defend against the Southern Yi

Jing gui 競 Elder Father Yushi Jing Metal 簋 (4134-5) Xi ( Bo Xifu 御事競伯屖父)

Si ding  Duke Zhai Si  Horses The king first (?) at Chengzhou 鼎 (2659) (Zhaigong 溓公)

Fan gui 繁 The Elder of Fan 繁 The Duke Twenty hides? ( 柀), The Duke ( Gong 公) 公簋 (4146) Ji ( Jibo  (Gong ) cowries (ten strings) assigns Fan to 伯) accompany the Elder of Ji on an attack

Naizi Ke The Elder of Naizi Ke 乃 Silk (fifty lue ) ding 乃子 Xin ( Xinbo 子克克鼎辛伯) (2712)

357

Table 4.2: Instances of mieli in middle Western Zhou inscriptions 3

Vessel Location Venue Chief Target Performed Gifts Other Other people Other important name performer on behalf ceremonies events of

Shi The king "The "Beneficences" ( xiu The former king(s) ( xian wang Duke Gui, Marshal Wang descendants of 休) 先王); the Grand Marshal Wang's deceased ding 師 the sagely man" (Taishi 太師) father, served under 望鼎 (sheng ren zhi the former king(s) (2812) hou 聖人之後) (i.e., the descendants of Duke Gui (Guigong 宄公), including Marshal Wang, "scion under the Grand Marshal" (Taishi xiaozi Shi Wang 太師小子師望)

Da gui Zheng 鄭 The king Da 大 Livestock sacrifice Di/chi 禘/啻大簋 (sheng 牲) (red, grain- (4165) fed), awarded by the king for use in the di 啻 (禘) offering to Da's father

You gui The king You  Oxen (three) "Offering up" 升 簋 (sheng )? (4194)

Duan gui Bi 畢 The king Duan 段 A large allotment of Zheng 蒸 Bi Zhong 畢仲 (an ancestor of 段簋大則 4 5 land ( da ze ) ("steamed Duan); Long Ge 龏 (4208) offerings"); "enjoyment" (xiang 享; "offerings" (si

3 I have omitted the Shi Qiang pan and the Shi Yu guigai , since the mieli they describe are hypothetical. 4 On the reading of the character as ze 則 and its gloss as “an allotment of land,” see MWX , 189, n. 4. 358 5 饋

Following MWX in reading this as a personal name and the following character as kui , “to give a gift”; see ibid.

祀)

Mian you Zheng 鄭 The Great The king Mian 免, a A black leather The king appoints 免卣 Hall (Taishi Supervisor of kneepad with white Mian as Supervisor (5418), 太室) Works ( sigong hemp-colored band of Works? (This Mian zun 四工) (following the reading inscription may 免尊 in MWX , p. 179, n. 1) relate to the (6006) appointment, or it may simply acknowledge Mian's status; the distinction is unclear from the inscription.)

Yi zhi Zhou The Great The king Yi  Gathered jacket ( shi yi Appointment Yi's father and 戠衣 觶 Hall (Taishi ), black leather ceremony, hui grandfather/ancestors ( jue 太室厥祖考 (6516) ) kneepad with white (ȼ) (entreaty) zukao ) hemp-colored bands (see MWX , p. 179, n. 1, under the Mian zun ), banner

Yi hegai Lu 魯 The king Yi 義 Cowries (ten strings) Archery ( she The king hosts an 義盉蓋射) archery tournament (9453) in which numerous subordinate rulers participate

Mian Zhou The king Mian 免 One hundred The Document Maker and pan 免盤 containers of salt ( lu Interior Scribe ( Zuoce Neishi 6 作冊內史 (10161) bai X 鹵百 ) ) (following the reading in MWX , p. 179, n. 1b)

Shi Ju Zhou The Kang The king? Marshal Ju (Shi A mian (?) jade tablet "Feasting" Superintendent Li ( Zai Li 宰利) 師遽 fangyi Bedchamber Ju ) (mian[?] gui  圭), (wan/xiang 師遽方 at Zhou four jade ring- form 2 (Zhou Kang 鄉彝 ornaments ( huan )"drinking" 周康寢醴 (9897) qin ) zhang 環璋) (li ) (?)

Xian Pangjing The king? Xian 鮮 A zhang -jade 璋; Di/chi 禘/啻; King Zhao ( Zhao Wang 昭王) gui/pan three jade items for libation ( guan

6 This inscription contains the simple character mie () rather than the full phrase mieli 蔑歷. Based on the contents of the inscription, I believe the meaning is 359

equivalent here.

鮮盤 guan-libation ( guan 祼) (10166) yu san pin 祼玉三品), cowries (twenty strings)

Chang The City of the King Mu Chang Xin 長 The king Archery ( she The Grand Invoker ( Da zhu 大 The king holds a Xin he Lower Moat (Mu Wang (2) 射), "drinking" 祝) feast; the Elder of 下淢穆王  長 盉 (Xia Yu Ju )? (1); (li 醴) (?); Jing and the Grand Invoker perform (9455)  [居]) 7 the Elder of "feasting" Jing ( Jingbo (wan/xiang archery; after that, 井伯) (2) form 2 鄉) Chang Xin has his merits recounted and is assigned to the Elder of Jing. Whether both the king and the Elder recount Chang Xin's merits, or whether the king assigns the responsibility thereof to the Elder, is unclear.

Gong Ji The ? Pond "The Gong Ji 公姞 Fish (three hundred) “Offerings” ( si Zi Zhong 子仲 Zi Zhong fishes ( yu li 公姞鬲 ([?] chi ? 池) Heavenly (i.e., the duke's 祀) 漁) at the ? Pond (753) Ruler wife of the Ji (tianjun 天 surname?) 君)" (the queen?)

Yin Ji li The Zhou Forest The ancestral "The Yin Ji 尹姞 Five items of jade ( yu Duke Mu ( Mugong 穆公) Duke Mu builds an 尹姞鬲 (Zhou lin 繇林) hall of Yin Ji [Heavenly] (i.e., the Chief's wu pin 玉五品), three ancestral hall for (754-5) (Yin Ji Ruler" wife of the Ji horses Yin Ji zongshi 尹 ([Tian] jun surname?) (to 姞) 天君) (the be identified queen?) with Gong Ji 公姞?)

榮 Si gui Rong Si  , etc. The king Flags with bells ( luan "The distant states" ( wang bang The king sends 鑾旂往邦 簋 qi )? ) Rong to perform the (4192-3) recounting of merits and issue commands and accoutrements to "the distant states" ( wang bang 往邦); Si is one

360 7  居

Following MWX ’s reading of the third character as ju , glossed as "city/capital"; see MWX , 105, n. 1.

recipient of the king's gesture

Shi Zai The Elder Marshal Zai The king? A dark robe with fine "My august deceased father The king rewards 師 ding Grand (Shi Zai 師 ) embroidery ( xuan gun King Mu" ( zhen huang kao Mu Zai, who served Marshal ( Bo 朕皇考穆王 under his 鼎 [?] chun 玄袞 Wang ); "the Taishi 伯太 former kings" ( xian wang 先 predecessor as well; (2830) [ ] 純); a red 師) 王); "a Grand Marshal" ( Taishi the Elder Grand kneepad ( chi fu 赤巿), Marshal, Zai's 太師) (used to describe an a vermilion sash superior, performs accoutrement); "your sagely the recounting of (zhu ? 朱 ) (per grandfathers and deceased merits for him. MWX, p. 136, n. 6), a father" ( nai sheng zu kao 乃聖 flag with bells ( luan 祖考); "Duke High Father 鑾旂 qi ) , the metal (Hu?)" ( Gong Shangfu [Hu?] horse-girdle of a 公上父胡); "the former Grand Marshal ancestors" ( xian zu 先祖); "the 大師 (Taishi jin ying 孫子金膺 descendant" ( sun zi ) ) ( MWX , p. 136, (referring to Shi Zai, per MWX; n. 7), and a bridle ( you see p. 136, n. 13); "the martial 攸勒 le ), given to servants [of the Elder Grand Marshal Zai by the Marshal]" ( Bo Taishi wuchen king 伯太師武臣) (this may refer instead to the Elder Grand Marshal himself); "his (the Elder Grand Marshal's?) fierce grandfathers" ( jue lie zu 厥烈祖); "my [i.e., Zai's] deceased father Guo (per JC) Jifu" ( zhen kao Guo Jifu 朕考虢季父)

師 Yu yan "the Old Army" The Yu  Marshal Metal Marshal Yongfu ( Shi Yongfu Marshal Yongfu 古師 甗 (Gu shi ) Marquis of Yongfu 雍父) garrisons his troops Hu ( Huhou (Shi Yongfu at "the Old Army (948) 胡侯) 師雍父)? [Camp]." He sends Yu to the Marquis of Hu. 8

Tun ding Kang Wei 亢 Kang Wei? Tun 屯屯鼎衛?9 (2509- 10)

8 Shirakawa gives an orthographic argument for the identity of the Yu of the Yu yan and the X of the X ding ; see Shirakawa, vol. 2, p. 182. 9 The role of the phrase Kang Wei 亢衛 in this inscription is ambiguous; it may refer to the person carrying out the mieli ceremony for Tun, or it may refer to the 361

location of the ceremony. The phrase appears nowhere else in the AS database inscriptions.

胡其父師 X ding Hu Qifu X  Marshal Metal Marshal Yongfu ( Shi Yongfu X follows Marshal  鼎 Yongfu 雍父) Yongfu on an (Shi Yongfu inspection of roads, (2721) 師雍父)? arriving at Hu

Lu gui Elder Father Lu 彔 Red metal ( chi jin 赤 Elder Father Yong 彔簋 Yong ( Bo 金) comes from Hu 胡 (4122) Yongfu 伯 and recounts Lu's 雍父) merits

Ci you Gong Ji 公 Ci 次 A horse, a fur coat "The men of the fields" ( tian Gong Ji commands 次卣姞? (qiu 裘) ren 田人) Ci to take charge of (5405), "the men of the Ci zun fields" ( tian ren 田次尊人) (5994)

Ju you "the Old Marshal Ju  Cowries (thirty lue ) Ju follows Marshal 10 卣 Encampment" Yongfu ( Shi Yongfu to garrison (5411) (gu shi 古師) Yongfu 師 the Old 雍父)? Encampment ( gu shi 古師)

淮夷 Lu you "the Old Elder Father Lu Dong 彔 Cowries (ten strings) The Huaiyi ; the Marshals The king sends Lu 彔卣 Encampment" Yong ( Bo of Chengzhou ( Chengzhou Dong to garrison the (5419- (gu shi 古師) Yongfu 伯 shishi 成周師氏) Marshals of 20) (see Ju you 雍父) Chengzhou at the [5411]) Old Encampment, in response to attacks on the inner states (neiguo 內國) by the Huaiyi

Fan you The duke Fan 繁 Ancestral temple Di/chi 禘/啻; Duke Xin ( Xingong 辛公) 繁卣公宗彝 (gong ) vessels ( zongyi ) rong () (5430) 肆 (one set? Si ), (twice) chariot, horses (two)

赤 You zun "the Old Zhong You  Red metal ( chi jin Elder Father Yong ( Bo Yongfu You follows Elder 仲競伯雍父 尊 Encampment" Jingfu 金) ) Father Yong to 古師 (6008) (gu shi ) 父 garrison the Old (see Ju you Encampment [5411])

362 10  師次

I depart from the AS database transcription in reading the element here as shi , “army/encampment,” rather than as ci .

Table 4.3: Datings of middle Western Zhou mieli inscriptions 11

Vessel name Date per MWX Date per Shirakawa Date per Other Royal or non- Duandai royal?

Si gui 簋 (4192-3) King Zhao (124) King Zhao (94) Non-royal (on behalf)

Lu you 彔卣 (5419-20) Probably King Zhao (17: 205 [5419]) King Kang (see p. King Mu ( Daxi 33b); King Mu? See Bureaucracy 226, n. 40 Non-royal 2)

Yin Ji li 尹姞鬲 (754-5) King Xiao (316) King Zhao (72, pp. 800-1) King Zhao (97) Royal (vessel 755) (queen)?

Gong Ji li 公姞鬲 (753) King Zhao (72, pp. 800-1 [by King Zhao (98) Royal connection with the Yin Ji ding ) (queen)? 12

Ci you 次卣 (5405), Ci King Zhao (72, p. 800-1, 806 [by King Zhao (see p. Zhoujin 2.34.3, 5.90.1 (5405) Non-royal zun 次尊 (5994) connection with the Gong Ji li and the 2) Yin Ji li ])

Chang Xin he 長 盉 King Mu (163) King Mu (19:103) King Mu (103) King Mu standard vessel (see Sources, pp. 110-1) Royal? (9455)

Xian gui/pan 鮮盤 Ouyi 108; King Mu ( Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu , p. Royal? (10166) 60); dating standard for King Mu; but see Sources , p. 285, for a King Xuan dating

Yu yan 甗 (948) King Mu (183) King Zhao-King Mu? (see note 26) King Kang (78) King Mu ( Daxi 32a) Non-royal

X ding 鼎 (2721) King Mu (184) King Zhao-King Mu? (see note 26) King Kang (see p. King Mu ( Daxi 31b) Non-royal 2)

Lu gui 彔簋 (4122) King Mu (175) King Zhao-King Mu? (see note 26) King Kang (see p. King Mu ( Daxi 34b); see Bureaucracy 226, n. 40 Non-royal 2)

Ju you 卣 (5411) King Mu (182) King Zhao-King Mu? (see note 26) King Mu ( Daxi 32b) Non-royal

Fan you 繁卣 (5430) King Mu (191) Non-royal

11 This chart includes many inscriptions often dated to the reign of King Zhao. Though the standard periodization of the Western Zhou period assigns King Zhao to the late phase of the early Western Zhou and his successor, King Mu, to the early phase of the middle Western Zhou, this study has found that certain important changes in the royal practice of ritual suggest that King Zhao’s administration was in many ways different from its predecessors; see chapter 5. 363 12

On the possibility that the Yin Ji li and Gong Ji li inscriptions record mieli performed by the Zhou queen for the wife of a lesser lord, see Shirakawa 72, p. 802.

You zun 尊 (6008) King Mu (186) King Zhao-King Mu? (see note 26) King Kang (see p. King Mu ( Daxi 33a) Non-royal 2)

You gui 簋 (4194) King Mu (18: 238) King Zhao (96) Royal

Da gui 大簋 (4165) King Yi 夷 (393) Kings Mu-Gong (118, pp. 491-4) King Gong (121) On the dating of this bronze, see chapter 2, n. 22. Royal

Shi Ju fangyi 師遽方彝 King Gong (197) Early King Mu? (19:99, p. 303) King Gong (115) See Bureaucracy 231, n. 50 (either Mu or Gong) Royal? (9897)

13 Shi Zai ding 師鼎 King Gong (202) King Gong or King Xiao (appendix, Bureaucracy : King Gong (p. 338); Wenwu 1975.8 (King Gong) Non-royal (on (2830) vessel 9) behalf)

Shi Wang ding 師望鼎 King Gong (213) Probably King Gong (22:130) See Bureaucracy 227, n. 41; Kings Yih-Xiao Royal (2812)

Duan gui 段簋 (4208) King Yih 懿 King Zhao (14:74) Royal (261)

Mian you 免卣 (5418), King Yih 懿 Kings Gong-Yih (21:115) King Yih 懿 (183) Royal Mian zun 免尊 (6006) (249) (vessel (vessel 6006) 6006)

懿懿 Yi zhi 觶 (6516) King Yih King Gong (21:114) King Yih (132) Royal (248)

Yi hegai 義盉蓋 (9453) Late Zhou dynasty ( Kaogu 1986.11); see note 92 Royal

Mian pan 免盤 King Yih 懿 Kings Gong-Yih (21:115) King Yih 懿 (131) Royal (10161) 14 (250)

Tun ding 屯鼎 (2509- Sandai 3.27.2 Non-royal 10)

13 Wu Zhenfeng and Luo Zhongru, “Shaanxi sheng Fufeng xian Qiangjiacun chutu de Xi Zhou tongqi,” Wenwu 1975.9, 57-62, 103-4; for the dating, see p. 58.

14 This inscription contains the simple character mie () rather than the full phrase mieli 蔑歷. Based on the contents of the inscription, I believe the meaning is 364

equivalent here.

Table 4.4: Instances of mieli in late Western Zhou inscriptions

Vessel Location Venue Chief Target Gifts Other Other people Other important events name performer ceremonies

Wu gui Chengzhou the Great The king Yu 敔 A jade gui -tablet 圭, a "Reporting" Duke Wu ( Wugong 武公); the southern Huaiyi ( Nan The Southern Huaiyi launch 敔簋 Temple zan libation-cup 瓚, (gao 告) Huaiyi 南淮夷); the Elder of Rong ( Rongbo 榮伯) an attack in the center of (4323) (damiao fifty strings of cowries, Zhou power, around the Luo 大廟) fifty fields of land at river; Wu conducts a successful campaign against Han  , fifty fields of them, taking many captives. land at Zao 早

Cheng Fusheng 鳧 Cheng gui 爯簋生爯 (3912-3)

Liang Qi The Liang "[My/our] greatly illustrious august grandfathers and The King appoints Liang Qi zhong 梁 king/Son of Qi 梁其 deceased father" ( pi xian huang zu kao 丕顯皇祖考); as "Great Rectifier of the 其鐘 Heaven "the former kings" ( xian wang 先王); "the lords of Lords of States" ( bang jun da 邦君大正 (187-92) states" ( bang jun 邦君); "the Great Rectifier of the zheng ) Lords of States" ( bang jun da zheng 邦君大正) (a position to which Liang Qi is appointed); "the former cultured men" ( qian wen ren 前文人)

365

Fig. 2.1: The inscription of the Zuoce Yi you 作冊益卣 (5427) (after JC 5427, following the AS database)

366

Fig. 2.2: Selected instances of zheng in the bronze inscriptions (after the AS database)

Da Yu ding 大盂鼎 (2837) Gao you 高卣 (5431) Duan gui 段簋 (4208) Fifth-year Hu zhong 五祀 Hu gui 簋 (4317)

鐘 (358)

姬鼎陳 15 陳侯午敦 Taishi Cuo dou 大師豆 Ji ding (2681) Chen Gongzi Shu Yuanfu yan X Fu Ji lei 父己罍 (9788) Chenhou Wu gui (4692) 公子叔原父甗 (947) (4646)

15 The X Fu Ji lei is a late Shang vessel, according to the AS database. It appears here for purposes of comparison, because the AS database glosses the “X” in its 367 烝

inscription as zheng .

Fig. 2.3: Variants of the character su 餗餗餗 in the oracle bones ( after JGWZGL ), with the Xi Shi zun 士尊 (5985) character (after the AS database)

3206 3207 3208.1 3208.2 3209.1 3209.2 3209.3 3209.4 X Shi zun 士尊

368

369

Fig. 3.1: Variants on feng /related characte rs in the OBI (after JGWZGL )

2807 2808 2809

Fig. 3.2: Examples of feng in the bronze inscriptions ( after the AS database)

Mai fangzun 麥方 Tian Wang gui 天 He zun 尊(6014) Fengbo ge 豐伯戈 Fengwang fu 豐王斧尊 (6015) 亡簋 (4261) (11014) (11774 ) (hewen with wang 王)

Fenggong ding 豐 Xiaochen Zhai gui Zuoce Hu you 作册 Chang Xin he 長 公鼎 (2152) 小臣宅簋 (4201) 卣 (5432) 盉 (9455) (read in JC as li 醴)

Fig. 3.3: The inscription of the Li juzun (after JC 6011, following the AS database )

370

Fig. 7.1: Instances of guan 祼祼祼 in the AS inscriptions (after the AS database)

毓祖丁卣我鼎 Yuzu Ding you (5396) Wo ding (2763) (cover) Wo ding (2763) (vessel) He zun 尊(6014) De fangding 德方鼎 (2661)

Geng Ying ding 庚嬴鼎 (2748) Shi Shou ding 史獸鼎 (2778) Xiao Yu ding 小盂鼎 (2839) Rong gui 榮簋 (4121) Shou Gong pan 守宮盤 (10168)

不栺鼎不栺鼎鄂侯馭方鼎 Bu Zhi ding (2735) Bu Zhi ding (2736) Xian gui 鮮（鮮盤）(10166) Ehou Yufang ding (2810) Guan yi 匜 (10177)

Maogong ding 毛公鼎 (2841)

371

372

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AS database: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan shiyusuo jinwen gongzuoshi 中央研究院史語所金文工作室, Yin Zhou jinwen ji qingtongqi ziliaoku 殷周金文暨青銅器資料庫 (“Digital Archives of Bronze Images and Inscriptions”). Accessible at http://www.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/~bronze/.

Bamboo Annals: Legge, James. The Chinese Classics, vol. 3: The Shoo King or the Book of Historical Documents , part 1, “Prolegomena.” Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960.

BSOAS: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London

Bureaucracy: Li Feng. Bureaucracy and the State in Early China: Governing the Western Zhou. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Conggu: Xu Tongbai 徐同柏, Conggu tang kuanzhi xue 從古堂款識學, 16 juan , Shanghai: Tongwen shuju, 1886. Preface by Ruan Yuan, 1839.

Daxi: Guo Moruo 郭沫若, Liang Zhou jinwen ci daxi tulu kaoshi 兩週金文辭大係圖錄考釋, 8 vols., Beijing: Kexue, 1958. Page numbers refer to shiwen 釋文 unless otherwise specified.

Duandai: Chen Mengjia 陈梦家. Xi Zhou tongqi duandai 西周铜器断代. Ed. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2004.

EC: Early China

ECT: Loewe, Michael, ed. Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide . Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

Guwenzi zhong: Chen Mengjia 陈梦家. “Guwenzi zhong de Shang Zhou jisi 古文字中的商周祭祀.” Yanjing xuebao 18-19 (1935.1), 91-155.

HJAS: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies

JC: Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所, ed. Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng 殷周金文集成. 18 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984-94.

JGWZGL: Yu Xingwu 于省吾 and Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂, eds. Jiaguwenzi gulin 甲骨文字诂林. 4 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1996.

373

Jinwen zhong: Liu Yu 刘雨. “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli 西周金文中的祭祖礼.” Kaogu xuebao 1989.4, 495-522.

Jizuli: Liu Yuan 刘源. Shang Zhou jizuli yanjiu 商周祭祖礼研究. Beijing: Shangwu, 2004.

JL: Liu Yu and Lu Yan 卢岩, eds. Jinchu Yin Zhou jinwen jilu 近出殷周金文集录. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002.

Jungu: Wu Shifen 吳式芬. Jungu lu jinwen 攟古錄金文. 9 vols. Haifeng: Wushi, 1895.

JWGL: Zhou Fagao 周法高, ed. Jinwen gulin 金文詁林. 15 vols. Hong Kong: Xianggang zhongwen daxue, 1974-1975.

Kaogutu : Lü Dalin 呂大臨. Kaogu tu 考古圖. In Song ren zhulu jinwen congkan chubian 宋人著录金文丛刊初编. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2005 (1092).

Kezhai : Wu Dacheng 吳大瀓, Kezhai jigu lu 愙齋集古錄, 26 vols., Shanghai: Hanfenlou, 1918, preface 1896.

Landscape and Power: Li Feng, Landscape and Power in Early China: The Crisis and Fall of the Western Zhou, 1045-771 BC . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Liulihe: Beijing shi wenwu yanjiu suo 北京市文物研究所. Liulihe Xi Zhou Yan guo mudi , 1973-1977 琉璃河西周燕国墓地，1973 －1977. Beijing: Wenwu, 1995.

MWX: Shanghai bowuguan Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan bianxiezu 上海博物馆商周青铜器铭文选编写组. Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwenxuan 商周青铜器名文选. 4 vols. Beijing: Wenwu, 1986-90. Page numbers are in volume 3 unless otherwise specified.

Sackler: Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes from the Arthur M. Sackler Collections . Washington, D.C.: The Arthur M. Sackler Foundation, 1990.

Sandai: Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉. Sandai jijin wencun 三代吉金文存. Baijuezhai, 1936.

Shanghai: Shanghai bowuguan 上海博物馆. Shanghai bowuguan cang qingtongqi 上海博物馆藏青铜器. 2 vols. Shanghai: Renmin, 1964.

Shiji: Wang Liqi 王利器, ed. Shiji zhuyi 史记主译. Xi'an: Sanqin, 1988.

Shirakawa: Shirakawa Shizuka 白川静. Kinbun tsuushaku 金文通釈. 56 vols. Hakutsuru bijutsukan shi 白鶴美術館誌. Kobe, 1966-83.

374

Shisanjing zhushu: Shisanjing zhushu 十三经注疏. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980.

Shuowen: Duan Yucai 段玉裁. Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1981.

Sources: Edward L. Shaughnessy. Sources of Western Zhou History: Inscribed Bronze Vessels , Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991.

Tongkao: Rong Geng 容庚. Shang Zhou yiqi tongkao 商周彝器通考. 2 vols. Beiping: Harvard-Yenching Institute, 1941.

Xia Shang Zhou: Chen Peifen 陳佩芬. Xia Shang Zhou qingtongqi yanjiu: Shanghai bowuguan cang pin 夏上周青銅器研究：上海博物館藏品. 6 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2004.

Zhangjiapo: Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所, ed. Zhangjiapo Xi Zhou mudi 张家坡西周墓地. Beijing: Zhongguo dabaike quanshu, 1999.

Zhenbu : Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉, Zhensong tang jigu yiwen buyi 貞松堂集古遺文補遺, 3 juan , Shanghai: Yin yin lu, 1931-1934.

Zhensong : Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉, Zhensong tang jigu yiwen 貞松堂集古遺文, 16 juan , 1930.

Zhoujin: Zou An 鄒安. Zhou jinwen cun 周金文存. 2 vols. Taipei: Tailian guofeng, 1978.

Zhouyuan: Cao Wei 曹瑋, ed. Zhouyuan chutu qingtongqi 周原出土青銅器. 10 vols. Chengdu: Ba shu, 2005.

375

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allan, Sarah. The Shape of the Turtle: Myth, Art, and Cosmos in Early China . Albany: SUNY Press, 1991.

“Art and Meaning.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes , ed. Roderick Whitfield, 9-33. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.

“Tian as Sky: The Conceptual Implications.” In En suivant la Voie Royale: Mélanges offerts en homage à Léon Vandermeersch, Études thématiques 7, ed. Jacques Gernet and Marc Kalinowski, 225-30. Paris: École Française d’Extrême- Orient, 1997.

“On the Identity of Shang Di 上帝 and the Origin of the Concept of a Celestial Mandate ( tian ming 天明).” EC 31 (2007): 1-46.

ed., The Formation of Chinese Civilization: An Archaeological Perspective . New Haven, London: Yale University Press; Beijing: New World Press, 2005.

“The Identity of Shang Di and the Origin of the Celestial Mandate.” Early China 31 (2007), 1-46.

Ban Gu 班固. Hanshu buzhu 漢書補注. Edited by Wang Xianqian 王先謙. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983.

Barrett, J.C. “The Living, the Dead and the Ancestors: Neolithic and Bronze Age Mortuary Practices.” In The Archaeology of Context in the Neolithic and Bronze Age: Recent Trends, ed. J.C. Barrett and Ian Kinnes, 30-41. Sheffield: Sheffield University, 1988.

Bagley, “Meaning and Explanation.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes , ed. Roderick Whitfield, 34-55. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.

Bauer, Brian S. “Legitimization of the State in Inka Myth and Ritual.” American Anthropologist 98.2 (Jun. 1996), 327-37.

Beard, Mary. The Roman Triumph . Cambridge, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007.

376

Beaudrillard, Jean. The System of Objects . Translated by James Benedict. London, New York: Verso, 2005.

Beijing daxue kaoguxi Shang Zhou zu 北京大学考古系商周组, Shanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo 山西省考古研究所, and Zou Heng 邹衡. Tianma Qucun, 1980-1989 天马曲村, 1980-1989. 4 vols. Beijing: Kexue, 2000.

Beijing shi wenwu yanjiu suo 北京市文物研究所. Liulihe Xi Zhou Yan guo mudi , 1973- 1977 琉璃河西周燕国墓地，1973 －1977. Beijing: Wenwu, 1995.

Bell, Catherine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice , New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Boltz, William G. “Chou li 周礼.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 24-32. Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

“I li 儀禮.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 234-43. Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

Bussel, Gerard W. van, Paul L.F. van Dongen, and Ted J.J. Leyenaar. The Mesoamerican Ballgame: Papers presented at the International Colloquium ‘The Mesoamerican Ballgame 2000 BC-AD 2000,’ Leiden, June 30 th -July 3 rd , 1988 . Leiden: Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde, 1991.

Callon, Michel. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” In Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge , ed. John Law, 196-233. London, Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986.

Cao Wei 曹瑋. Zhouyuan jiaguwen 周原甲骨文. Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2002.

Cen Zhongmian 岑仲勉. Xi Zhou shehui zhidu wenti 西周社会制度问题. Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1957

K.C. Chang (Kwang-chih Chang). “The Animal in Shang and Chou Bronze Art.” HJAS 41.2 (Dec. 1981), 527-554.

The Archaeology of Ancient China . New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1968.

377

Art, Myth, and Ritual: The Path to Authority in Ancient China. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1983.

Chang I-ren 張以仁, William G. Boltz, and Michael Loewe. “Kuo yü 國語.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 24-32. Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.p. 263-8.

CHANT OBI database (http://www.chant.org).

Chen Gongrou 陈公柔. “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de Xinyi Chengzhou yu Wangcheng 西周金文中的新邑、成周、与王城.” In Qingzhu Su Binqi kaogu wushiwu nian lunwenji 庆祝苏秉琦考古五十五年论文集, 386–97. Beijing: Wenwu, 1989.

Chen Gongrou 陈公柔 and Zhang Changshou 张长寿. “Yin Zhou qingtong rongqi shang niaowen de duandai yanjiu 殷周青铜容器上鸟纹的断代研究.” In Wang Shimin 王世民, Chen Gongrou, and Zhang Changshou, Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu 西周青铜器分期断代研究, Beijing: Wenwu, 1999, pp. 202-3, 207-8.

Chen Hanping 陈汉平. Xi Zhou ceming zhidu yanjiu 西周册命制度研究. Shanghai: Xuelin, 1986.

Chen Mengjia 陈梦家. “Guwenzi zhong de Shang Zhou jisi 古文字中的商周祭祀.” Yanjing xuebao 18-19 (1935.1), 91-155.

Xi Zhou tongqi duandai 西周铜器断代. Ed. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2004.

Chen Qiyou 陈奇猷. Hanfeizi jishi 韩非子集释. Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1974.

Lüshi chunqiu jiaoshi 吕氏春秋校释. Shanghai: Xuelin, 1984.

Chen Quanfang 陈全方. Zhouyuan yu Zhou wenhua 周原与周文化. Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1988.

Chen Xianfang 陈贤芳. “Fu gui zun yu Zi zun 父癸尊与子尊.” Wenwu 1986.1, pp. 44- 5.

Chen Zhaorong 陳昭容. “Liang Zhou hunyin guanxi zhong de ‘ying’ he ‘yingqi’ – qingtongqi mingwen zhong de xingbie, shenfen yu juese yanjiu zhi er 兩週婚姻關係中的‘媵’與媵器 ── 青銅器銘文中的性別、身分與角色研究之二.” Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 77.2 (2006), 193-278.

Conggu: Xu Tongbai 徐同柏, Conggu tang kuanzhi xue 從古堂款識學, 16 juan , Shanghai: Tongwen shuju, 1886. Preface by Ruan Yuan, 1839.

378

Cook, Constance. “Wealth and the Western Zhou.” BSOAS 60.2 (1997), 253-94.

Czarniawska, Barbara. “On Time, Space, and Action Nets.” Organization 16.6 (2004), 777-95.

Creel, Herrlee G. The Origins of Statecraft in China, vol. 1: The Western Chou Empire . Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

Daxi: Guo Moruo 郭沫若, Liang Zhou jinwen ci daxi tulu kaoshi 兩週金文辭大係圖錄考釋, 8 vols., Beijing: Kexue, 1958. de la Vega, Inca Garcilaso. Royal Commentaries of the Incas and General History of Perú . Translated by H. V. Livermore. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1989 (1609).

DeMarrais, Elizabeth, Luis Jaime Castillo, and Timothy Earle. “Ideology, Materialization, and Power Strategies.” Current Anthropology 37.1 (Feb. 1996), 15-31.

Dietler, Michael. “Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy: Food, Power, and Status in Prehistoric Europe.” In Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, ed. Polly Wiessner and Wulf Schiefenhovel, 86-126. Providence: Berghahn Books, 1996.

Dong Lianchi 董莲池. “Yin Zhou diji tanzhen 殷周禘祭探真.” Renwen zazhi 1994.5, 75-8.

Dong Zengling 董增齡. Guoyu zhengyi 國語正義. Guiji Zhang shi shixuntang, 1880.

Douglas, Mary. Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology . New York: Vintage Books, 1973.

Dreyfus, Hubert L., and Paul Rabinow, eds. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.

Duan Yucai 段玉裁. Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1981.

Dumont, Louis. “Religion, Politics, and Society in the Individualistic Universe.” Proceedings of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 1970, 31-41.

Edwards, I.E.S., F.B.A. “The Early Dynastic Period in Egypt.” In The Cambridge Ancient History I.2, Early History of the Middle East , ed. I.E.S. Edwards F.B.A., C.J. Gadd F.B.A., and N.G.L. Hammond F.B.A, 1-70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.

379

Wang Entian 王恩田. “Luyi Daqinggong Xi Zhou da mu yu Weizi feng Song 鹿邑太清宫西周大墓与微子封宋.” Zhongyuan wenwu 2002.4, 41-5.

Falkenhausen, Lothar von. Suspended Music: Chime-bells in the Culture of Bronze Age China . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

“Late Western Zhou Taste.” Etudes Chinoises 18.1-2, 1999, 143-78.

Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius (1000-250 BC): The Archaeological Evidence . Los Angeles: The Cotsten Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, 2006.

Fan Yuzhou. “Some Comments on Zhouyuan Oracle Bone Inscriptions: A Response to Edward L. Shaughnessy.” EC 11-12 (1985-7), 177-81.

Feng Shi 冯时. “Ban fangding, Rong Zhong fangding ji xiangguan wenti 坂方鼎、荣仲方鼎及相关问题.” Kaogu 2006.8, 67-73.

Flad, Rowan. “Ritual or Structure? Analysis of Burial Elaboration at Dadianzi, Inner Mongolia.” JEAA 3.3-4 (2001), 23-52.

Foucault, Michel. “The Subject and Power.” In Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics , ed. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.

Frazer, James George. The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion . New York: Macmillan, 1951 (1922).

Foster, Robert J. “Nurture and Force-feeding: Mortuary Feasting and the Construction of Collective Individuals in a New Ireland Society.” American Ethnologist 17.3 (Aug. 1990), 431-48.

Fox, John W. Maya Postclassic State Formation: Segmentary Lineage Migration in Advancing Frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Gao Ming 高明. Guwenzi leibian 古文字类编. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1982.

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1973.

Gennep, Arnold van. Les rites de passage . Paris: Libraire Critique Émile Nourry, 1909.

Gell, Alfred. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

380

Gernet, Jacques, and Marc Kalinowski, eds. En suivant la Voie Royale: Mélanges offerts en homage à Léon Vandermeersch. Études thématiques 7, Paris: École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1997.

Giddens, Anthony. The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration . Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984.

Gillespie, Susan D. “Ballgames and Boundaries.” In The Mesoamerican Ballgame , ed. Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox, 317-46. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1991.

Godelier, Maurice. The Enigma of the Gift . Translated by Nora Scott. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

Grynpas, Benedykt. Les écrits de Tai l’Ancien et le petit calendrier des Hia . Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient A. Maisonneuve, 1972.

Gu Jiegang 顧頡剛 and Luo Genze 羅根澤, eds. Gu shi bian 古史辨, vol. 1-7. Beiping: Pushe, 1926-41.

Guo Baojun 郭宝钧. Shang Zhou tongqiqun zonghe yanjiu 商周铜器群综合研究. Beijing: Wenwu, 1981.

Guo Moruo 郭沫若. Bu ci tong zuan 卜辭通纂. Dongjing: Wenjiutang, 1933 (reprint: Beijing, Kexue, 1983).

“Chang Xin he ming shiwen 长甶盉銘釋文.” Wenwu cankao ziliao 1955.2, 128.

Guo Moruo and Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, eds. Jiaguwen heji 甲骨文合集. 13 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1978-83.

He Shuhuan 何樹環. Xi Zhou ximing mingwen xin yan 西周錫命銘文新研. Taibei: Wenjin, 2007.

“Sishi’er nian Lai ding ‘lai shu,’ ‘ce lai’ shiyi – fu ‘ceming mingwen’ ming shi bianzheng 四十二年逨鼎《 書》、《冊 》釋義── 附《冊命銘文》名實辨正.” Zhengda zhongwen xuebao 2006.12, 75-102.

Henan sheng wenwu kaogu yanjiusuo 河南省文物考古研究所 and Zhoukou shi wenhuaju 周口市文化局. Luyi Daqinggong Changzi Kou Mu 鹿邑大清宫长子口墓. Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou guji, 2000.

Homans, George C. “Anxiety and Ritual: The Theories of Malinowski and Radcliffe- Brown.” American Anthropologist 43.2.1 (Apr.-Jun. 1941), 164-72.

381

Huang Huaixin 黄怀心. Yizhoushu jiaobu zhuyi 逸周书校补注译. Xi’an: Sanqin, 2006.

Huang Ranwei 黃然偉. Yin Zhou qingtongqi shangci mingwen yanjiu 殷周青銅器賞辭賜銘文研究. Hong Kong: Longmen, 1978.

Hsu, Cho-yun. “The Spring and Autumn Period.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 545-86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Hsu, Cho-yun, and Katheryn Linduff. Western Chou Civilization . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988.

Hu Xinsheng 胡心生. “Xi Zhou shiqi san lei butong xingzhi de sheli jiqi yanbian 西周时期三类不同性质的社礼及其演变.” Wen shi zhe 2003.1, 112-7.

Hyslop, John. Inka Settlement Planning . Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990.

Jiang Nan 姜楠. “’She li’ yuanliu kao 射礼源流考.” Beijing ligong daxue xuebao 2004.6, pp. 94-6.

Jiang Yunkai 姜运开and Wang Yutang 王玉堂. “Mie li, ran gan shi 蔑、 甘释.” Hunan shiyuan xuebao (Zhexue shehui kexue ban) , 1981.2, 93-4.

Jiao Zhiqin 焦智勤. “Buci liaoji de yanbian 卜辞燎祭的演变.” Yindu xuekan 2001.1, 27-9.

Jungu: Wu Shifen 吳式芬. Jungu lu jinwen 攟古錄金文. 9 vols. Haifeng: Wushi, 1895.

Kane, Virginia. “Aspects of Western Zhou Appointment Inscriptions: the Charge, the Gifts, and the Response.” Early China 8 (1982-3), 14-28.

Kaogutu : Lü Dalin 呂大臨. Kaogu tu 考古圖. In Song ren zhulu jinwen congkan chubian 宋人著录金文丛刊初编. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2005 (1092).

Keightley, David N. Sources of Shang History: The Oracle-Bone Inscriptions of Ancient China . Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978.

“The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 232-91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

The Ancestral Landscape: Time, Space, and Community in Late Shang China, Ca. 1200-1045 B.C. Berkeley: UC Berkeley, Center for Chinese Studies, 2000.

382

Kern, Martin. Shi Jing Songs as Performance Texts: A Case Study of ‘Chu Ci’ (Thorny Caltrop).” EC 25 (2000), 49-111.

ed. Text and Ritual in Early China . Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2005.

“The Performance of Writing in Western Zhou China.” In The Poetics of Grammar and the Metaphysics of Sound and Sign , ed. Sergio La Porta and David Shulman, 109-76. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

“Bronze Inscriptions, the Shijing , and the Shangshu : The Evolution of the Ancestral Sacrifice during the Western Zhou,” In Early Chinese Religion, Part 1: Shang through Han , [1250 B.C.-220 A.D.] , ed. John Lagerwey and Marc Kalinowski, 143-200. Leiden: Brill, 2009.

Kezhai : Wu Dacheng 吳大瀓, Kezhai jigu lu 愙齋集古錄, 26 vols., Shanghai: Hanfenlou, 1918, preface 1896.

Khayutina, Maria. “Royal Hospitality and Geopolitical Construction of the Western Zhou Polity.” T’oung Pao 96 (2010), 1-73.

Khryukov, Vassili. “Symbols of Power and Communication in Pre-Confucian China (On the Anthropology of De): Preliminary Assumptions.” BSOAS , vol. 58, no. 2 (1995), 314-33.

Lagerwey, John, and Marc Kalinowski, eds. Early Chinese Religion, Part 1: Shang through Han (1250 BC to 220 AD). Leiden: Brill, 2009.

Latour, Bruno. We Have Never Been Modern . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993.

“On Recalling ANT.” In Actor Network and After , ed. John Law and John Hassard, 15-25. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999.

“Gabriel Tarde and the End of the Social,” in The Social in Question: New Bearings in History and the Social Sciences , ed. Patrick Joyce, 117-32. London: Routledge, 2002.

Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Law, John, ed. Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge . London, Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986.

383

Lefeuvre, J.A. “Les inscriptions des Shang sur carapaces de tortue et sur os: aperçu historique et bibliographique de la découverte et des premières etudes.” T’oung Pao 61 (1975), 1-82.

Legge, James. The Chinese Classics, vol. 3: The Shoo King or the Book of Historical Documents . Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960.

Li Boqian 李伯谦. “Shu Ze fangding mingwen kaoshi 叔夨方鼎铭文考释.” Wenwu 2001.8, 39-42.

Li Feng. “’Offices’ in Bronze Inscriptions and Western Zhou Government Administration.” EC 26-7 (2001-2), 1-72.

“Literacy Crossing Cultural Borders: Evidence from the Bronze Inscriptions of the Western Zhou Period (1045-771 B.C.).” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 74 (June 2002), 210-42.

“Feudalism and Western Zhou China: A Criticism.” HJAS 63.1 (June 2003), 115-44.

“Textual Criticism and Western Zhou Bronze Inscriptions: The Example of the Mu Gui.” In Essays in Honor of An Zhimin , ed. Tang Chung and Chen Xingcan, 280-97. Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004.

Landscape and Power in Early China: The Crisis and Fall of the Western Zhou, 1045-771 BC . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Bureaucracy and the State in Early China: Governing the Western Zhou. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

“Literacy and the Social Contexts of Writing in the Western Zhou.” In Writing and Literacy in Early China: Studies from the Columbia Early China Seminar , ed. Li Feng and David Prager Branner, 271-302. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2011.

Li Jinshan 李锦山. “Liaoji qiyuan yu dongbo yanhai diqu 燎祭起源于东部沿海地区.” Zhongguo wenwu yanjiu 7 (Spring 1995), 37-43.

Li Kai 李凯. “Shilun Zuoce Ban yuan yu wan Shang sheli 试论作册般鼋与晚商射礼.” Zhongyuan wenwu 2007.3, 46-50.

Li Shan 李山 and Li Guitian 李贵田. “ Shi ‘biyong’ kao 诗‘辟雍’考.” Hebei shifan daxue xuebao 2003.4, 70-7.

Li Xueqin 李学勤. “Xi Zhou zhongqi qingtongqi de zhongyao biaochi – Zhouyuan Zhuangbai, Qiangjia liang chu qingtongqi jiaocang de zonghe yanjiu 西周中期青

384

铜器的重要标尺—周原庄白、强家两处青铜器窖藏的综合研究.” Zhongguo lishi bowuguan guankan 1 (1979), 29-36.

“He zun xin shi 何尊新释.” Zhongyuan wenwu 1981.1, 37-41, 47.

“Are They Shang Inscriptions or Zhou Inscriptions?” EC 11-12 (1985-7), 173-6.

“Zhong fangding yu ‘Zhouyi’ 中方鼎与《周易》.” Wenwu yanjiu 1989.6, 197- 201.

Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu 新出青铜器研究. Beijing: Wenwu, 1990.

“Wu Hu ding kaoshi – Xia Shang Zhou duandai gongcheng kaoguxue biji 吴虎鼎考释－夏商周断代工程考古学笔记.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1998.3, 29-31.

“The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project: Methodology and Results.” JEAA 4.1-4 (2002), 321-33.

“Zuoce Ban tong yuan kaoshi 作册般铜鼋考释.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 4-5.

“Shilun xin faxian de Ban fangding he Rong Zhong fangding 试论新发现的方鼎和荣仲方鼎.” Wenwu 2005.9, 59-65, 69.

“Shang mo jinwen zhong de zhiguan ‘xie’ 商末金文中的职官‘攜’.” Shihai zhenji – qingzhu Meng Shikai xiansheng qishi sui wenji 史海侦迹——庆祝孟世凯先生七十岁文集. Hong Kong: Xin Shiji, 2006.

“Lun Lu gui de niandai 论簋的年代.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.3, 7-8.

“Lun Zhou chu de E guo 论周初的鄂国.” Zhonghua wenshi luncong 2008.4, 1-7, 389.

Li Xueqin and Ai Lan 艾兰. “Xian gui de chubu yanjiu 鲜簋的初步研究.” Zhongguo wenwu bao 1990.

Li Yubiao 李裕杓. “Xin chu tongqi mingwen suo jian Zhao Wang nanzheng 新出铜器铭文所见昭王南征.” In Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi 新出金文与西周历史, ed. Zhu Fenghan 朱凤瀚, 275-85. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2011.

Li Yung-ti. “On the Function of Cowries in Shang and Western Zhou China.” JEAA 5 (2006), 1-26.

385

Li Zhongcao 李仲操. “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de funü chengwei 西周金文中的妇女称谓.” Baoji wenbo 1991.1, 35-9.

Liang Qixiong 梁啟雄, ed. Xunzi jianshi 荀子柬釋. Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1936.

Liu Baonan 劉寶楠. Shisanjing Qing ren zhushu: Lunyu zhengyi 十三經清人注疏：論語正義. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1990.

Liu Huan 刘桓. “Ye tan Bo Tangfu ding mingwen de shidu – jian tan Yin dai jisi de yige wenti 也谈伯唐父鼎铭文的释读——兼谈殷代祭祀的一个问题.” Wenbo 1996.6, 27-9.

Liu Lamei 刘腊梅. “Qianxi Yin dai wanqi zhi Chunqiu shiqi “diji” de bianhua 浅析殷代晚期至春秋时期《禘祭》的变化.” Heilongjiang shizhi 2009.19, 119, 125.

Liu Yu 刘雨. “Xi Zhou jinwen zhong de jizuli 西周金文中的祭祖礼.” Kaogu xuebao 1989.4, 495-522.

“Bo Tangfu ding de mingwen yu shidai 伯唐父鼎的铭文与时代.” Kaogu 1990.8, 741-2.

Liu Yu and Lu Yan 卢岩, eds. Jinchu Yin Zhou jinwen jilu 近出殷周金文集录. Beijing: Zhonghua, 2002.

Liu Yuan 刘源. Shang Zhou jizuli yanjiu 商周祭祖礼研究. Beijing: Shangwu, 2004.

Loehr, Max. Ritual Vessels of Bronze Age China . New York: Asia Society, 1968.

Loewe, Michael, ed. Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide . Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

Lu Liancheng 卢连成. “Zhou du yu Zheng kao 周都与郑考.” In Guwenzi lunji 古文字论集 (Kaogu yu wenwu congkan 考古于文物丛刊 no. 2), ed. Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo 陕西省考古研究所. Xi’an: 1983, 8–11.

“Xi Zhou Ze guo shiji jiqi xiangguan wenti 西周夨国史迹及其相关问题.” In Xi Zhou shi yanjiu 西周史研究 (Renwen zazhi congkan 人文杂志丛刊 no. 2), 232- 48. Xi’an: 1984.

“An di yu Zhao Wang shijiu nian nanzheng 地与昭王十九年南征.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1984.6, 75-79.

386

Lu Liancheng and Hu Zhisheng 胡智生. Baoji Yu guo mudi 宝鸡 国墓地. 2 vols. Beijing: Wenwu, 1988.

Luo Xizhang 罗西章. “Zhouyuan qingtongqi jiaocang jiqi youguan wenti de tantao 周原青铜器窖藏及其有关问题的探讨.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1988.2, 40-7.

Luo Zhenyue 罗振跃. “’Mieli’ yici zai jinwen zhong de hanyi ji ci shi 《蔑历》一词在金文中的含义即赐食.” Guizhou daxue xuebao 19.5 (2001), 69-72.

Luoyang shi wenwu gongzuodui 洛阳市文物工作队. Luoyang Beiyao Xi Zhou mu 洛阳北窑西周墓. Beijing: Wenwu, 1999.

Ma Chengyuan 马承源. “He zun mingwen chushi 尊铭文初释.” Wenwu 1976.1, 64-5, 93.

MacKinnon, J. Jefferson, and Emily M. May. “The Ballcourts of C’hacben K’ax and its Neighbors: the Maya Ballgame and the Late Classic Colonial Impulse in Southern Belize.” In The Mesoamerican Ballgame: Papers presented at the International Colloquium ‘The Mesoamerican Ballgame 2000 BC-AD 2000,’ Leiden, June 30 th - July 3 rd , 1988 , ed. Gerard W. van Bussel, Paul L.F. van Dongen, and Ted J.J. Leyenaar, 71-80. Leiden: Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde, 1991.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays . Garden City: Doubleday, 1954.

Marcus, Joyce. “Women’s Ritual in Formative Oaxaca: Figurine-making, Divination, Death, and the Ancestors.” Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, no. 33. Ann Arbor, 1998.

Matsui Yoshinori 松井嘉德. “Western Zhou History in the Collective Memory of the People of the Western Zhou: An Interpretation of the Inscription of the ‘Lai pan.’” Toyoushi kenkyuu 66.4 (2008), 664-712.

Matsumaru Michio 松丸道雄, ed. Sei Shuu seidouki to sono kokka 西周青銅器とその国家. Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku, 1980.

Matsumaru Michio 松丸道雄 and Takashima Ken’ichi 高島謙一, eds. Koukotsu moji jishaku souran 甲骨文字字釈綜覧. Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku, 1993.

Mauss, Marcel. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Translated by W.D. Halls. London: Routledge, 1990.

McAnany, Patricia A. Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in Ancient Maya Society . Austin: University of Texas Press, 1995.

387

Mol, Annemarie, and John Law. “Regions, Networks, and Fluids: Anaemia and Social Topology.” Social Studies of Science 24 (1994), 641-71.

Mu Haiting 穆海亭 and Zhu Jieyuan 朱捷元. “Xin faxian de Xi Zhou wangshi zhong qi Wusi Hu zhong kao 新发现的西周王室重器五祀盙钟考.” Renwen zazhi 1983.2, 118-21.

Mu Xiaojun 穆晓军. “Shaanxi Chang’an xian chutu Xi Zhou Wu Hu ding 陕西长安县出土西周吴虎鼎.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1998.3, 69-71.

Musha Akira 武者章. “Sei Shuu satsumei kinbun bunrui no kokoromi 西周冊命金文分類のこころみ.” In Sei Shuu seidouki to sono kokka 西周青銅器とその国家, ed. Matsumaru Michio 松丸道雄, Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku, 1980, pp. 49-132.

Nietszche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy . Translated by Douglas Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Nivison, David Shepherd. “The Dates of Western Chou.” HJAS 43.2 (1983), 481-580.

“Chu shu chi nien.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 39-47. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

“The Classical Philosophical Writings.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 745-812. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Nylan, Michael. The Five Confucian Classics . New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001.

Peirce, Charles Sanders. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 2: Elements of Logic. Cambridge: Belknap, 1960

Puett, Michael. To Become a God: Cosmology, Sacrifice, and Self-Divinization in Early China. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002.

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. “Ji 姬 and Jiang 姜: The Role of Exogamic Clans in the Organization of the Zhou Polity.” EC 25 (2000), 1-27.

Qingyang diqu bowuguan 庆阳地区博物馆 and Xu Junchen 许俊臣, “Gansu Qingyang diqu chutu de Shang Zhou qingtongqi 甘肃庆阳地区出土的商周青铜器,” Kaogu yu wenwu 1983.3, 8-11.

Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭. “Du ‘Anyang xin chu de niujiagu jiqi keci’ 读《安阳新出的牛胛骨及其刻辭》.” Kaogu 1972.5, 43-5.

388

“Shang tong yuan ming bushi 商铜鼋铭补释.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.6, 4- 5.

Rasmussen, Susan J. “Alms, Elders, and Ancestors: The Spirit of the Gift among the Tuareg.” Ethnology 39.1 (2000), 15-38.

Rawson, Jessica. “Statesmen or Barbarians? The Western Zhou as Seen through their Bronzes.” Proceedings of the British Academy 75 (1989), 71-95.

Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes from the Arthur M. Sackler Collections . Washington, D.C.: The Arthur M. Sackler Foundation, 1990.

“Western Zhou Archaeology.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 352-449. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Riegel, Jeffrey K. “Li chi 禮記.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 293-7. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

“Ta Tai Li chi 大戴禮記.” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 456-9. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

Sandai: Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉. Sandai jijin wencun 三代吉金文存. Baijuezhai, 1936 。

Santley, Robert S., Michael J. Berman, and Rani T. Alexander, “The Politicization of the Mesoamerican Ballgame and its Implications for the Interpretation of the Distribution of Ballcourts in Central Mexico.” In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, ed. Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox, 1-25. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1991.

Sena, David. “Reproducing Society: Lineage and Kinship in Western Zhou China.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 2005.

Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo 陕西省考古研究所. Gaojiabao Ge guo mu 高家堡戈国墓. Xi’an: Sanqin, 1994.

Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo 陕西省考古研究所, Baoji shi kaogu gongzuodui 宝鸡市考古工作队, and Meixian wenhuaguan 眉县文化馆. “Shaanxi Meixian Yangjiacun Xi Zhou qingtongqi jiaocang fajue jianbao 陕西眉县杨家村西周青铜器窖藏发掘简报.” Wenwu 2003.6, 4-42.

Shaanxi sheng kaogu yanjiusuo 陕西省考古研究所, Shaanxi sheng wenwu guanli weiyuanhui 陕西省文物管理委员会, and Shaanxi sheng bowuguan 陕西省博物馆, eds. Shaanxi chutu Shang Zhou qingtongqi 陕西出土商周青铜器. 4 vols.,

389

Beijing: Wenwu, 1979-84.

Shaanxi sheng wenwu guanli weiyuanhui 陕西省文物管理委员会. “Chang’an Puducun Xi Zhou mu de fajue 长安普渡村西周墓的发掘.” Kaogu xuebao 1957.1, 75-85, 220-5.

Shaanxi sheng wenwuju 陕西省文物局. Shengshi jijin: Shaanxi Baoji Meixian qingtongqi jiaocang 盛世吉金：陕西宝鸡眉县青铜器窖藏. Beijing: Beijing, 2003.

Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui 陕西周原考古队. “Shaanxi Fufeng Zhuangbai yi hao Xi Zhou qingtongqi jiaocang fajue jianbao 陕西扶风庄白一号西周青铜器窖藏发掘简报.” Wenwu 1978.3, 1-18, 98-104.

“Shaanxi Fufeng xian Yuntang, Zhuangbai er hao Xi Zhou tongqi jiaocang 陕西扶风见云唐、庄白二号西周铜器窖藏.” Wenwu 1978.11, 6-10, 99-101.

“Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi faxian jianbao 陝西岐山凤雏村西周建筑基址发现简报.” Wenwu 1979.10, 27-37.

“Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun faxian Zhou chu jiaguwen 陝西岐山凤雏村发现周初甲骨文.” Wenwu 1979.10, 38-43, 100-3.

Shanghai: Shanghai bowuguan 上海博物馆. Shanghai bowuguan cang qingtongqi 上海博物馆藏青铜器. 2 vols. Shanghai: Renmin, 1964.

Shanghai bowuguan Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan bianxiezu 上海博物馆商周青铜器铭文选编写组. Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwenxuan 商周青铜器名文选. 4 vols. Beijing: Wenwu, 1986-90.

Shao Ying 邵英. “Zongzhou, Haojing, yu Pangjing 宗周、镐京与京.” Kaogu yu wenwu 2006.2, 41-5.

Shaughnessy, Edward L. “The Composition of the Zhouyi. ” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1983.

“Zhouyuan Oracle-Bone Inscriptions: Entering the Research Stage?” EC 11-12 (1985-7), 146-63.

“Extra-Lineage Cult in the Shang Dynasty: A Surrejoinder.” EC 11-12 (1985-7), 182-94.

Sources of Western Zhou History: Inscribed Bronze Vessels , Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991.

390

“The Duke of Zhou’s Retirement in the East and the Beginnings of the Minister- Monarch Debate in Chinese Philosophy.” EC 18 (1993), 41-72.

“Shang shu 尚書 (Shu ching 書經).” In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide , ed. Michael Loewe, 376-89. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.

“Western Zhou History.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 292-351. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Before Confucius: Studies in the Creation of the Confucian Classics , Albany, NY; State University of New York Press, 1997.

ed. New Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of Inscriptions and Manuscripts . Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, 1997.

“Historical Perspectives on the Introduction of the Chariot into China.” HJAS 48.1 (June 1998), 189-237.

“The Writing of a Late Western Zhou Bronze Inscription.” Asiatische Studien 51.3 (2007), 845-77.

“Chronologies of Ancient China: A Critique of the ‘Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project.’” In Clara Wing-chung Ho, Windows on the Chinese World: Reflections by Five Historians, 15-28. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2009.

Sheng Dongling 盛冬铃. “Xi Zhou tongqi mingwen zhong de renming jiqi dui duandai de yiyi 西周铜器铭文中的人名及其对断代的意义.” Wenshi 17 (1983), 27-64.

Shang Tongliu 商彤流 and Sun Qingwei 孙庆伟. “Tianma-Qucun yizhi Beizhao Jinhou mudi di liu ci fajue 天马——曲村遗址北赵晋侯墓地第六次发掘.” Wenwu 2001.8, 4-21, 55.

Shi Yan 史言. “Fufeng Zhuangbai Dadui chutu de yi pi Xi Zhou tongqi 扶风庄白大队出土的一批西周铜器.” Wenwu 1972.6, 30-5.

Shirakawa Shizuka 白川静. “Betsureki kai 蔑曆解.” Koukotsugaku 甲骨學 4-5 (1959) ， 89-104.

Kinbun tsuushaku 金文通釈. 56 vols. Hakutsuru bijutsukan shi 白鶴美術館誌. Kobe, 1966-83.

391

Shisanjing zhushu: Shisanjing zhushu 十三经注疏. 2 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1980.

Sima Qian 司馬遷. The Grand Scribe’s Records, vol. 1: The Basic Annals of Pre-Han China. Edited by Nienhauser, William H., Jr. Translated by Tsai-fa Cheng, Zongli Lu, William H. Nienhauser, Jr., and Robert Reynolds. Taipei: SMC Publishing, 1994.

Song Tianhao 宋填豪. “Cong xin chu jiagu jinwen kaoshu wan Shang sheli 从新出甲骨金文考述晚商射礼.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.1, 10-18.

Soriano, Waldemar Espinoza. Los Incas: economía, sociedad, y Estado en el era de Tawantinsuyo. Lima: Amaru, 1987.

Su Yu 蘇與. Chunqiu fanlu yi zheng 春秋繁露. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992.

Sun Qingwei 孙庆伟. “Zhou dai guanli de xin zhengju – jieshao zhendan yishu bowuguan xin cang de liangjian zhanguo yuzan 周代礼的新证据——－介绍震旦艺术博物馆新藏的两件战国玉瓒.” Zhongyuan wenwu 2005.1, 69-75.

“Shuo Zhou dai ceming li de ‘fan ru jin zhang’ he ‘fan ru jin gui’ 说周代册命礼的‘反入堇璋’和‘反入堇圭’.” In Gudai wenming yanjiu tongxun 古代文明研究通讯 23 (2004), ed. Beijing daxue zhendan gudai wenming yanjiu zhongxin 北京大学震旦古代文明研究中心, 32-7.

Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. Culture, Thought, and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective . Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1985.

Magic, Science, Religion, and the Scope of Rationality . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Tang Lan 唐兰, “Xi Zhou jinwen duandai zhong de Kang Gong wenti 西周金文中的康宫问题,” Kaogu xuebao 1962.1, 15-48.

“He zun mingwen jieshi 尊铭文解释.” Wenwu 1976.1, p. 60-3.

Tang Lan xiansheng jinwen lunji 唐兰先生金文论集. Ed. Gugong bowuyuan 故宫博物院. Beijing: Zijincheng, 1995.

“Yihou Ze gui kaoshi 宜侯夨簋考释.” In Tang Lan xiansheng jinwen lunji 唐兰先生金文论集, ed. Gugong bowuyuan 故宫博物院, 66-71. Beijing: Zijincheng, 1995.

Xi Zhou qingtongqi mingwen fendai shizheng 西周青铜器铭文分代史徵. Beijing: Zhonghua: 1986.

392

Tao Xisheng 陶希生. Xi Zhou zhengjiao zhidu yanjiu 西周正教制度研究. Taipei: Zhonghua wenhua fuxing yuekan she, 1979.

Thorp, Robert L. China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006.

Tongkao: Rong Geng 容庚. Shang Zhou yiqi tongkao 商周彝器通考. 2 vols. Beiping: Harvard-Yenching Institute, 1941.

Trigger, B.G. “The Rise of Civilization in Egypt.” In The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 1: From the Earliest Times to c. 500 B.C. , ed. J. Desmond Clark, 478-547. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Turner, Victor W. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.

Twitchett, Denis, and John Fairbank, eds. Cambridge History of China , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978-, vol. 1.

Ucko, Peter J. “Foreword.” In The Formation of Chinese Civilization: An Archaeological Perspective , ed. Sarah Allan, xi-xii. New Haven, London: Yale University Press; Beijing: New World Press, 2005.

Wang Aihe. Cosmology and Political Culture in Early China . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Wang Changqi 王长启. “Xi’an shi wenwu zhongxin suocang Shang Zhou qingtongqi 西安市文物中心所藏商周青铜器.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1990.5, 9-15.

Wang Guanying 王冠英. “Ren ding mingwen kaoshi 任鼎铭文考释.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2004.2, 20-24.

“Zuoce Ban tong yuan san kao 作册般铜鼋.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 11- 3。

“Lu gui kaoshi 簋考释.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.3, 4-6.

Wang Guowei 王国维. “Shi ‘you’ 释‘宥’.” Guantang bieji 观堂别集, 5-6. In Wang Guowei yishu 王国维遗书, Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1983, vol. 4.

“Mingtang miao qin tongkao 明堂庙寝通考.” Congshu jicheng xubian 丛书集成续编 10. Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1994.

393

Wang Hui 王辉. “Xi Zhou jinei diming xiaoji 西周畿内地名小记.” Kaogu yu wenwu 1985.3, 26-31.

Wang Junhua 王军花. “Biyong kao 辟雍考.” Xungen 2007.3, 59-61.

Wang Liqi 王利器, ed. Shiji zhuyi 史记主译. Xi'an: Sanqin, 1988.

Wang Longzheng 王龙正 and Jiang Tao 姜涛. “Xin faxian de Zhabo gui jiqi mingwen kaoshi 新发现的柞伯簋及其铭文考释.” Wenwu 1998.09, 53-8.

Wang Longzheng 王龙正 and Yuan Junjie 袁俊杰. “Zhabo gui yu da sheli ji Xi Zhou jiaoyu zhidu 柞伯簋与大射礼及西周教育制度.” Wenwu 1998.09, 59-61.

Wang Pinzhen 王聘珍. Da Dai liji jiegu 大戴礼记. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983.

Wang Shimin 王世民, Chen Gongrou 陈公柔, and Zhang Changshou 张长寿. Xi Zhou qingtongqi fenqi duandai yanjiu 西周青铜器分期断代研究. Beijing: Wenwu, 1999.

Wang Shumin 王叔民. Zhuangzi jiaoquan 莊子校詮. Taipei: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo, 1988.

Wang Yuxin. “Once Again on the New Period of Western Zhou Oracle Bone Research.” EC 11-12 (1985-1987), 164-72.

“Zhouyuan miaoji jiagu ‘ce Zhoufang bo’ xinxi 周原廟祭甲骨‘周方伯’新析.” Wenwu 1988.6, 67-71.

Wang Yuxin 王宇信 and Yang Shengnan 杨升南, eds. Jiaguxue yibai nian 甲骨学一百年. Beijing: Shehui kexue wenxian, 1999.

Wang Zhiguo 王治国, “Sishi’er nian Lai ding suo fanying de Xi Zhou wanqi ceming liyi de bianhua, 四十二年逨鼎所反映的西周晚期册命礼仪的变化.” In Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi 新出金文与西周历史, ed. Zhu Fenghan 朱凤瀚, 297-304. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2011.

Wang Zhongwen 汪中文. Xi Zhou ceming jinwen suo jian guanzhi yanjiu 西周册命金文所见管制研究. Guoli, 1999 。

Wei Juxian 衛聚賢. Gushi yanjiu 古史研究. Shanghai: Xinyue shudian, 1928.

Whitfield, Roderick, ed. The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes . London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.

394

Whittington, E. Michael, ed. The Sport of Life and Death: The Mesoamerican Ballgame . Charlotte: Mint Museum of Art in conjunction with Thames and Hudson, 2001.

Wiessner, Polly, and Wulf Schiefenhovel, eds. Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Providence: Berghahn Books, 1996.

Williams, Bruce, Thomas J. Logan, and William J. Murnane. “The Metropolitan Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imagery Before Narmer.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46.4 (Oct. 1987), 245-85.

Wu Xiaosong 吴晓松 and Hong Gang 洪刚. “Hubei Qichun Dacheng Xinwuwan Xi Zhou tongqi jiaocang 湖北蕲春达成新屋塆西周铜器窖藏.” Wenwu 1997.12, 29-33, 97.

Wu Zheng 吴铮. “Yin Zhou Hanyu mingliangci bianxi 殷周汉语名量词辨析.” Yindu xuekan 2009.3, 111-5.

Xia Hanyi 夏含夷(Edward L. Shaughnessy). “Shi Yufang 释驭方.” Guwenzi yanjiu 9 (1984), 97-109.

“Cong Lu gui kan Zhou Mu Wang zaiwei nianshu ji niandai wenti 从簋看周穆王在位年数及年代问题.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.3, 9-10.

“Cong Zuoce Wu he zai kan Zhou Mu Wang zaiwei nianshu ji niandai wenti 从作册吴盉再看周穆王在位年数及年代问题.” In Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi 新出金文与西周历史, ed. Zhu Fenghan 朱凤瀚, 52-5. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2011.

Xia Shang Zhou: Chen Peifen 陳佩芬. Xia Shang Zhou qingtongqi yanjiu: Shanghai bowuguan cang pin 夏上周青銅器研究：上海博物館藏品. 6 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2004.

Xia Shang Zhou duandai gongcheng zhuanjiazu 夏商周断代工程专家组. Xia Shang Zhou diandai gongcheng: 1996-2000 nian jieduan chengguo baogao 夏商周断代工程：1996 －2000 年阶段成果报告. Beijing: Shijie tushu, 2000.

Xi’an shi wenwu guanlichu 西安市文物管理处. “Shaanxi Chang’an Xinwangcun, Mawangcun chutu de Xi Zhou tongqi 陕西长安新旺村、马王村出土的西周铜器.” Kaogu 1974.1, 1-5, 69-72.

Xiqing : Liang Shizheng 梁詩正 et al., eds. Xiqing gujian 西清古鑑. 40 juan . Shanghai: Hongwen shuju, 1888.

395

Xiqingyi : Wang Jie 王傑 et al., eds. Xiqing xujian yi bian 西清續鑑乙編. Beiping: Beiping guwu chenliesuo, 1931.

Xu Chaohua 徐朝华. Erya jinzhu 尔雅今注. Tianjin: Nankai daxue, 1987.

Xu Ke 许科. “Gudai liaoji yongwu jiqi yiyi 古代燎祭及其意义.” Sichuan daxue xuebao (zhexue shehui kexue ban) 2008.3, 138-43.

Xu Lianggao 徐良高 and Wang Wei 王巍. “Shaanxi Fufeng Yuntang Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi de chubu renshi 陕西扶风云唐西周建筑基址的初步认识.” Kaogu 2002.9, 27-35.

Xu Tianjin 徐天进. “Zhougongmiao yizhi de kaogu suohuo ji suosi 周公庙遗址的考古所获及所思.” Wenwu 2006.8, 55-62.

Xu Xitai 徐锡台. Zhouyuan jiaguwen zongshu 周原甲骨文综述. Sanqin, 1987.

Xu Zhongshu 徐中舒. “Yu ding de niandai jiqi xiangguan wenti 禹鼎的年代及其相关问题.” Kaogu xuebao 1959.3, 53-66, 135-6.

Xu Zongyuan 徐宗元. “Jinwen zhong suo jian guanming kao 金文中所见官名考.” Fujian shifan xueyuan xuebao (zhexue shehui kexue ban) 1957.2, 1-35 (176-210).

Yan Yiping 嚴一萍. “Mieli guyi 蔑曆古意.” Zhongguo wenzi 10 (1962), 1-13.

Yang Kuan 杨宽. Xi Zhou shi 西周史. Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 2003.

Yang Zhou 杨州. “Jinwen ‘pin’ yu ‘guan yu san pin’ shu xi 金文‘品’与‘祼玉三品’梳析.” Shanxi shida xuebao (shehui kexue ban) 2007.3, 130-132.

Yoshimoto Michimasa 吉本道雅. “Sei Shuu satsumei kinbun kou 西周冊名金文考.” Shirin 史林 74.5 (1991), 38-66.

Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂, ed. Yinxu jiagu keci leizuan 殷墟甲骨刻辭類纂. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989.

Yu Weichao 俞伟超 and Gao Ming 高明. “Zhou dai yong ding zhidu yanjiu 周代用鼎制度研究.” Beijing daxue xuebao 1978.1, 85-99; 1978.2, 85-98; 1979.1, 84-97.

Yu Xingwu 于省吾. “Shi ‘ce’ 釋冊.” Jiaguwenzi shilin 甲骨文字釋林. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1979.

Yu Xingwu 于省吾 and Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂, eds. Jiaguwenzi gulin 甲骨文字诂林. 4 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1996.

396

Yuan Jing 袁靖. “Dongwu kaoguxue yanjiu de xin faxian yu xin jinzhan 动物考古学研究的新发现与新进展.” Kaogu 2004.7, 54-9.

Yuan Junjie 袁俊杰. “Bo Tangfu ding ming tongshi buzheng 伯唐父鼎铭通释补证.” Wenwu 2011.6, 38-43.

Zhang Changshou 张长寿. “Lun Jingshu tongqi – 1983-1986 nian Fengxi fajue ziliao zhi er 论井叔铜器——1983 －1986 年沣西发掘资料之二.” Wenwu 1990.7, 32-5, 102.

Zhang Chunyi 張純一. Mozi jijie 墨子集解. Shanghai: Shijie shuju, 1936.

Zhang Jiafang 张家芳. “Hubei Xiangfan jianxuan de Shang Zhou qingtongqi 湖北襄樊拣选的商周青铜器.” Wenwu 1982.9, 84-6.

Zhang Guangyu 張光裕. “Jinwen zhong ceming zhi dian 金文中冊命之典.” Xianggang zhongwen daxue Zhongguo wenhua yanjiusuo xuebao 10.2 (1979) ， 241-71.

Zhang Yachu 张亚初 and Liu Yu 刘雨, Xi Zhou jinwen guanzhi yanjiu 西周金文官职研究, Beijing: Zhonghua, 1986.

Zhang Yongshan 张永山. “Lu gui zuoqizhe de niandai 簋作器者的年代.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2006.3, 11-3.

Zhang Zhenglang 张政烺. “He zun mingwen jieshi buyi 何尊铭文解释补遗.” Wenwu 1976.1, 66.

“Bo Tangfu ding , Meng Yuan ding , yan mingwen shiwen 伯唐父鼎、孟员鼎、甗铭文释文.” Kaogu 1989.6, 551-2.

Zhao Guangxian 赵光贤. Zhou dai shehui bianxi 周代社会辨析. Beijing: Renmin, 1980.

Zhao Honghong 赵红红. “Shilun Xian Qin sheli de chansheng he xingcheng 试论先秦射礼的产生和形成.” Jiangnan daxue xuebao 2010.2, 57-63.

Zhenbu : Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉, Zhensong tang jigu yiwen buyi 貞松堂集古遺文補遺, 3 juan , Shanghai: Yin yin lu, 1931-1934.

Zhensong : Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉, Zhensong tang jigu yiwen 貞松堂集古遺文, 16 juan , 1930.

397

Zhouyuan kaogudui 周原考古队. “Shaanxi Fufeng xian Yuntang, Qizhen Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi 1999-2000 niandu fajue jianbao 陕西扶风县云唐、奇珍西周建筑遗址 1999 －2000 年度发掘简报.” Kaogu 2002.9, 3-26.

Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国科学院考古研究所. Fengxi fajue baogao 沣西发掘报告. Beijing: Wenwu, 1962.

Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji bianji weiyuanhui 中国青铜器全集编辑委员会, ed. Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji 中国青铜器全集. 16 vols. Beijing: Wenwu, 1993- 8.

Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所, ed. Yinxu Fu Hao mu 殷墟妇好墓, Beijing: Wenwu, 1980.

ed. Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng 殷周金文集成. 18 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984- 94.

ed. Yinxu de faxian yu yanjiu 殷墟的发现与研究. Beijing: Kexue, 1994.

Zhangjiapo Xi Zhou mudi 张家坡西周墓地. Beijing: Zhongguo dabaike quanshu, 1999.

Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中国社会科学院考古研究所 and Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo Liulihe kaogudui 北京市文物研究所琉璃河考古队. “Beijing Liulihe 1193 hao da mu fajue jianbao 北京琉璃河 1193 号大墓发掘简报.” Kaogu 1990.1, 20-31, 97-9.

Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Fengxi fajuedui 中国社会科学院考古研究所. “1984 nian Fengxi Dayuancun Xi Zhou mudi fajue jianbao 1984 年沣西大原村西周墓地发掘简报.” Kaogu 1986.11, 977-81, 1057-8.

“Chang’an Zhangjiapo M183 Xi Zhou dong shi mu fajue jianbao 长安张家坡 M183 西周洞室墓发掘简报.” Kaogu 1989.6, 524-9, 579-80.

Zhongmei lianhe Guicheng kaogudui 中美联合归城考古队. “Shandong Longkou shi Guicheng liang Zhou yizhi diaocha jianbao 山东龙口市归城两周遗址调查简报.” Kaogu 2011.3, 30-9.

Zhou Fagao 周法高, ed. Jinwen gulin 金文詁林. 15 vols. Hong Kong: Xianggang zhongwen daxue, 1974-1975.

Zhoujin: Zou An 鄒安. Zhou jinwen cun 周金文存. 2 vols. Taipei: Tailian guofeng, 1978.

398

Zhouyuan: Cao Wei 曹瑋, ed. Zhouyuan chutu qingtongqi 周原出土青銅器. 10 vols. Chengdu: Ba shu, 2005.

Zhu Fenghan 朱凤瀚. Shang Zhou jiazu xingtai yanjiu . Tianjin: Tianjin guji, 2004.

“Shi You ding yu Shi You gui 师酉鼎与师酉簋.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2004.1, 4-10, 35.

“Zuoce Ban yuan tanxi 作册般鼋探析.” Zhongguo lishi wenwu 2005.1, 6-10, 89-90.

“Jian lun yu Xi Zhou niandaixue you guan de ji jian tongqi 简论与西周年代学有关的几件铜器.” Paper presented at the conference “Ancient Chinese Bronzes from the Shouyang Studio and Elsewhere: An International Conference Commemorating Twenty Years of Discoveries.” Nov. 5-7, 2010.

ed. Xin chu jinwen yu Xi Zhou lishi 新出金文与西周历史. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2011.

Zhu Fenghan and Xu Yong 徐勇, Xian Qin shi yanjiu gaiyao 先秦史研究概要, Tianjin: Tianjin jiaoyu, 1996, 41-3.

Zhu Fenghan and Zhang Rongming 张荣明, eds. Xi Zhou zhuwang niandai yanjiu 西周诸王年代研究. Guiyang: Guizhou renmin, 1998.

Zhu Qizhi 朱其智. “’Mieli’ xin shuo ‘ 蔑’新说.” Zhongshan daxue xuebao 2010.6, 53-5.

Zou Heng 邹衡 et al., eds. Tianma-Qucun, 1980-1989 天马－曲村，1980 －1989 . 4 vols. Beijing: Kexue, 2000.